Definition of Open Source [was Re: pine: UW permission to distribute]
Bill Nottingham
notting at redhat.com
Fri Jul 23 18:50:58 UTC 2004
Michael Tiemann (tiemann at redhat.com) said:
> * Source and License. Is source code included with the package? If
> not, does the package need and deserve a "binary-only exception"? If
> source is available with the package, is the license governing the
> entire package open source (i.e., OSD-compliant)? If so, is it also
> free software? [Meets OSS and/or Free Software criteria for Fedora]
Well, the overarching definition of Core and Extras as originally
defined was that there were *no* binary exceptions.
> Common Fedora collection guidelines are as follows:
>
> First, all packages destined for any Fedora colletion must meet, for our
> own protection and sanity, the following standards:
>
> Open source and/or Free Software
> Shippable from the USA
> Meets other applicable US law (dual use, gambling, patent)
> Not of an adult only nature
> Building rules to meet policy above
> Active maintenance and release of code
> Must keep record/inform us of cryptography uses
> CVS committers to have signed needed paperwork
> Changes should always be pushed upstream when possible
> Active involvement with upstream packages
> Upstream view strongly favoured in maintainer choices
> Does not cause gratuitous offence (including in other countries)
> [ie nazi deathcamp pacman is out, but non gratuitous stuff
> like alcohol related software shouldn't be]
> (?)We host build CVS for packaging not packages themselves normally
> Project maintains web pages in the standard format
> Project maintains a signing key securely and a web page for it
> Project page content has any required footers/header notices
> Project keeps any seperate content/discussion board etc on its
> own site and clearly distinguishable from the hosting pages
This is good, but once you get to the latter few, you've gotten to the
point where we have no software. :)
> Fedora Extras: the maximal universe of packages that
>
> * include all Fedora Core packages
> * meet open source and legal requirements
> * are 100% consistent with Fedora Core
> * are 100% consistent (not conflicting) with each other
> * preference for packages that are state-of-the-art
> * preference for packages that have strong community support
>
> Fedora Extras can be viewed as what Fedora Core would be if there were
> no limits on the number or size of packages.
It's not just this. For example, Fedora Extras is more a target for
niche packages, whether it's a frobnicator for the MegaFrobozz PCI
card, or specialized biomedical imaging software.
> Fedora Addons: packages that are consistent with Fedora Core, but not
> necessarily all of Fedora Extras. This might be the one place where OSS
> requirements are overlooked, in which case this may be the collection
> where binary-only packages find their home(s). But that remains to be
> debated (i.e., we may want to never confuse people about what "Fedora",
> in all its incarnations, means).
The biggest issue here is that 'Addons' that don't fit the Core
or Extras profile mainly fall into two categories:
- can't ship because of free/OSS rules
- can't ship because of patent and other legal rules
The latter of those *cannot* be branded as Fedora(tm), and the
former really is a very small case.
> Fedora Desktop: a subset of Fedora Extras that provide all useful
> Desktop applications (Web browser, Email client, Word Processor,
> Spreadsheet, Presentation Software, Image Editing and Viewing Software,
> etc). This subset may also be a subset, superset, or a non-proper
> superset of Fedora Core.
>
> * if needed, can be "upgraded" to Fedora Core via a network
> connection by issuing the appropriate command
> * preference to include packages needed to support a "managed"
> and "secure" desktop environment
> * preference to avoid other packages not likely useful to a
> "typical" desktop user
> * preference to limit total packages to a minimal number of CDs
The desktop really should be a subset of Fedora Core. If a specific
need for something isn't satisfied for Core, it should be in Core.
> Fedora Alternatives and Fedora Legacy: defined externally. To first
> approximation, Fedora Alternatives are collections that meet OSS
> guideliness but do not meet Fedora Core and/or Fedora Extras
> compatibility requirements.
As originally defined, Alternatives is for alternative versions of
Core or Extras software, and Legacy is maintenance for previous
Core releases.
Bill
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list