Getting mono into FC extras
Tom 'spot' Callaway
tcallawa at redhat.com
Sat Mar 19 13:23:29 UTC 2005
On Sat, 2005-03-19 at 12:18 +0000, Paul wrote:
>I've taken the time to read over the reasoning behind not allowing (yet)
>Mono into FC Extras, but I have a bit of a problem with it.
Stop. Right now.
There is no conspiracy against Mono. Mono is legally ambigious. A post
to a mailing list does NOT consist of a legally binding patent grant of
any sort. You cannot use the "well, you have other legally ambigious
things" as grounds for inclusion.
If you know of a package in Fedora Core or Extras that is violating its
license, or various laws (specifically, US laws), point it out, and
we'll check it out through Red Hat Legal.
We will never include Mono, or anything that is obviously patented
without a patent grant in writing that permits unrestricted use and
redistribution, as per the terms of the GPL. We are not going to go
violate the GPLv2 because "everyone else is doing it".
If you care about Mono, there is a way to get it included:
Get a patent grant from Microsoft, in writing, that says that they
permit unrestricted use and redistribution of their patents in Mono.
Now think for just a second. If Microsoft really wanted people to use
Mono, wouldn't they have done this already? They have an army of
lawyers, who undoubtedly understand the GPL all too well. They have to
be aware that such a patent grant would be required for Mono to be legal
under the GPL. They have yet to do this.
If and when Microsoft does this (or Thomson, in the case of Mp3), we
will revisit the acceptance of Mono into FE. However, until that time,
the issue is closed. We cannot and will not willingly infringe upon
Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Sales Engineer || GPG Fingerprint: 93054260
Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices)
Aurora Linux Project Leader: http://auroralinux.org
Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my!
More information about the fedora-extras-list