Fedora spin from RpmFusion

Douglas McClendon dmc.fedora at filteredperception.org
Sun Sep 30 00:52:14 UTC 2007

Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Bill Nottingham wrote:
>> The guidelines were specifically designed so that someone could ship
>> stock Fedora and an additional repository of vendor packages, whether
>> it be Dell addons, Creative Commons content or whatever.
>> If those guidelines are followed, then, without actually changing the
>> guidelines, it doesn't really matter what that content/packages are.
> That is indeed my implicit question. Do you still want vendors to ship 
> software not included in Fedora and still call it Fedora? 

Nobody currently gets to call anything "Fedora" that isn't a very 
specific set of bits that are originally and solely shipped by the 
fedora project.

What they get to do, is take those bits as a whole, not modify them in 
any way whatsoever, and bundle them with other software, with the 
explicit restriction that-


       Any marketing materials related to such a distribution make clear 
that the vendor is providing patches which, if installed by the user, 
will modify the Fedora™ code from its original form.

Is it ok for
> anyone and everyone to do so with any set of software? Does the current 
> trademark guidelines match the goals of the project?

Honestly, what business is it of yours, how people distribute 
*unmodified* copies of fedora?  Sure I'd love to have a legal license 
which states that any free software I write, cannot be used by 
governments to support in any way whatsoever an institution which 
engages in 'baiting' tactics that use entrapment as justification for 
murder, but I'm a realist.  Hopefully our software will save more babies 
than it kills (or 'eats' is I suppose the parlance of choice...)


More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list