Announcing rpmfusion

[Valent Turkovic]

On 9/11/07, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 20:02:40 +0000 (UTC)
> > Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler at chello.at> wrote:
> >
> >> Rahul Sundaram <sundaram <at> fedoraproject.org> writes:
> >>> Thanks for this split. Hopefully we will able to link to the free
> >>> part from within Fedora.
> >> Unfortunately I don't think you will be able to. The stuff in the
> >> free part (or most of it, at least) is going to be exactly the stuff
> >> which Legal is most uncomfortable with: Free Software, but
> >> patent-encumbered in the US.
> >
> > And really, if we could reference it, then why the crap couldn't we
> > just package it in our repo?
>
> There is a lot of differences between pointing to the repository and
> including the packages directly as I already explained in Fedora
> Advisory Board list so I won't rehash all the arguments again now.
> Please read the releated threads if you missed it. In short, it is not
> possible to include patent-encumbered packages directly in the
> repository as long as it hosted in US. Pointing to it might very well be
> possible.
>
> Rahul

Yes! I cought a bit late on this thread but I can't be happier!
I started a threat that asked this exact question: why doesn't fedora
link to external repositories after users agreeing to some sort of
ULA.

What is the update on this topic? I really hope fedora goes ahead and
links to sites outside US that can legally host files.

It is a shame that worldwide users had to "suffer" because of US
legislative even if their countries (like mine) don't recognize
software patents.

Hope this changes in the future so please post a quick reply about
status of this issue.

Thank you in advance,
Valent.


-- 
http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com/
linux, blog, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless
registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org.
ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic