Free Software audit update

Patrice Dumas pertusus at free.fr
Mon Aug 21 10:33:51 UTC 2006


> in this case of openmotif, the open motif license, when used in fedora,
> allows for modifications and distributions of those modifications both
> in binary and source code form. That fits some peoples definition of
> free software. 
> 
> What it doesn't allow is taking openmotif and putting it in, say,
> windows. 

This could be considered, in some way, even more 'fundamentaly free' than 
the GPL as the GPL code don't mix with proprietary code, but with 
proprietary apps, while openmotif (shipped with fedora) don't even mix with 
some proprietary software (proprietary OS). But such a controversy
(and there may be more to say about what is free software from many
points of view) doesn't seem to be relevant to me. The issue is here
that of a definition.

Keeping openmotif or not based on some ideas about mixing with 
proprietary OS would be religious belief. I think that here this is not
the issue, the issue is simply, is openmotif OSI compliant? If not,
it shouldn't be shipped with fedora. Or fedora shold change its goals, 
to mention somehow that the softwares with openmotif licence are 
accepted.

> As such I agree with Ralf that this is a
> religious belief, not about "free software" per se. 

It's about the definition of free software, (or about the definition of 
fedora):

* if the definition of free software is the OSI definition then 
  openmotif isn't free software.
* If fedora is only made of OSI compliant softwares then openmotif 
  shouldn't be in fedora.

--
Pat




More information about the Fedora-maintainers mailing list