[Bug 178162] Review Request: libgeotiff

Josh Boyer jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org
Tue Oct 31 16:23:30 UTC 2006

On Tue, 2006-10-31 at 17:05 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> For Fedora Base (aka Core + Extras) I 100% agree but whats wrong with an
> additional repo which isn't enabled by default which lies the boundary
> at "no use restrictions accept for non commercial use only"?
> Again let me reverse the question from why a non commercial repo, to why
> not?

You are assuming (incorrectly) that Fedora Base is Core + Extras.
That's not the case.  Fedora is anything that is under the Fedora
Project umbrella.  Period.  That's why it's not a trivial task to
announce an official Fedora project.

Having a repository that allows packages under a non-commercial within
Fedora goes against the goal that Arjan already explained.  Users should
be able to take all of the Fedora repositories, make physical media out
of it, and sell it.

It also opens up some doors I personally would rather avoid.  For
example, we can't have Extras packages depending on non-commercial
packages.  And that's something reviewers and maintainers would have to
watch for adding extra burden on the reviewing process.  We have a slow
enough review process as it is...


More information about the Fedora-maintainers mailing list