What do you think of Centos
taharka
res00vl8 at alltel.net
Wed Feb 22 21:40:56 UTC 2006
Howdy,
On Wed, 2006-02-22 at 15:25 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-02-22 at 14:54, Christofer C. Bell wrote:
>
> > > The whole idea of the GPL is that if you receive something you
> > > must be allowed to redistribute it without any additional
> > > restrictions and any modifications must also be covered by
> > > the GPL. And if you do redistribute you must make the source
> > > available.
> >
> > That's right, and the underlying justification, the reason, is "being
> > a good neighbor."
>
> Ummm, no. It is a very strict requirement. The underlying
> justification is that Richard Stallman thought that is the way
> things should be. If you don't like it, you shouldn't be
> redistributing GPL'd works.
>
> > I don't think taking Red Hat's work, stripping it
> > of trademarks, and then sending it back out the door (regardless of
> > how *legal* it is) is morally justifiable.
>
> The trademarks are removed at Red Hat's insistence. How is the
> additional redistribution morally different than Red Hat's
> redistribution of other people's work in the first place?
>
> > It's not "being a good
> > neighbor."
>
> It is doing what the GPL intends for people to do - and essentially
> the same as all Linux distributions including Red Hat do with
> the underlying packages. What Red Hat sells is the support
> contract, not the software. Centos can't copy that.
Well put & correct me if I'm wrong. Doesn't Centos sell their own
support contract?
> --
> Les Mikesell
taharka
Lexington, Kentucky U.S.A.
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list