D1x license

[Ralf Corsepius]

On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 09:42 -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 12:08 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Yeah, I know it's a pretty common restriction. But, if we want to move more
> > of Core to Extras (and I think pretty much everyone agrees we do), and make
> > Extras easily selected from anaconda, Extras effectively become part of the
> > basic distribution that vendors might want to actually provide. And having a
> > single package in Extras with this restriction would then basically restrict
> > all of Fedora.
> > 
> 
> No it doesn't.
> It just means vendors need to check which packages from extras they can
> (or can not) distribute before burning their CD/DVD set.
> 
> However, putting that kind of stuff into rpm.livna.org and leaving
> extras with what is _truly_ freely redistributable makes it much easier.
I see 2 major problems:

1. Livna carries packages which potentially are lawful in the US,
therefore, AFAIK it probably would be lawful to direct users there, ...

2. Livna doesn't use the FE infrastructure.

As "non-free" doesn't necessarily mean "illegal", a FE/non-free (Non-
free in the sense of non-FOSS compliant but legal) repository would make
things even more easier and better maintainable.

Ralf