Fedora/RH policies sometimes suck

Ed Greshko Ed.Greshko at greshko.com
Tue Apr 10 02:56:11 UTC 2007


Res wrote:
> On Tue, April 10, 2007 12:41 pm, Matthew Miller wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 12:18:30PM +1000, Res wrote:
>>>> That's not "stripped", that's "can't legally include".
>>> BS, if the code producers have a complete package  and fedora decide
>>> they
>>> dont want to or cant for their own internal policy reasons include a
>>> part
>>> of it, thats STRIPPED, it is STRIPPED code that IS in the
>>> correct/real/publicly available TRUE source and binaries released by the
>>> code producers.
>> Again, nothing is stripped gratuitously. If it's not free software, it
>> can't
>> be included.
>>
> 
> but it is stripped, as it is not the same code as released by OOo

Fine, use "stripped", use "removed", use "altered".  It makes no difference
other than what the writer intends (or unintentionally) to imply.

Yes, portions of the original OpenOffice are (insert choice word here) due
to licensing and or other restrictions either expressly noted by OpenOffice
and/or its contributors or decided by the Fedora packagers to avoid
potential litigation.

Should you not like it, you are free to download the original rpm's from
OpenOffice.org.  FWIW, I can't find it...and nobody has pointed to the
original srpm from OpenOffice.org.

So, what is the BFD?




More information about the fedora-list mailing list