scientific license - fedora compatible?

[Hans de Goede]

Patrice Dumas wrote:
> 
> It seems to me that the scientists are more ready to abandon the 2 
> points above today because free software seems very succesfull and they 
> want to be part of it, but there are still almost free software packages
> that are not free (I can think of scilab, for example).
> 

Exactly and although I agree that the best thing would be if software 
like that would be relicensed under a truely open source license, 
unfortunatly this will not always happen.

Which brings us the a point which we have been over and over again. We 
could really use a Non Free or Non Commercial repo for stuff like this,
I know we have the repo which may not be named, but the may not be named 
is exactly the problem, if we want to cater as wide an audience as 
possible (and IMHO we do) we could really use a Non Commercial repo.

I know this doesn't fit into Fedora's goals. Still we could use one, I 
know I'm free to create such a repo myself, but I don't have the 
resources and I find it a waste of my (and others) time to invest time 
into reproducing all the infrastructure FE already has. So let my 
suggest (again) that "we" start a Non Commercial repo under the Fedora 
umbrella. Not using the Fedora name (anyone know a good name), but 
sharing the FE infrastructure.

Regards,

Hans


> --
> Pat
>