Vendor only distributable packages - was " Kernel 2059 from Dave Jones fixes nvidia.ko loading"

[Jeff Spaleta]

On 3/21/06, jharnish at ci.grand-rapids.mi.us
<jharnish at ci.grand-rapids.mi.us> wrote:
> Would it still be the same case if you distributed a package containing the yum repo > file for something like the Flash repo (http://macromedia.mplug.org/rep_uh.html) ?

Setting aside the issues associated with making shipping pre-approved
links to any 3rd party software repositories comfortable for the
lawyers whom I can not speak for.

And also side-stepping he issues of the support burden associated with
blurring the line between Fedora packages and 3rd party packages by
providing additional "legal" 3rd party configurations and whether that
will confuse the userbase as to which entity is responsible for
associated problems.

I will say that I personally would prefer if this project continues to
take a very hardline stance with regard to providing a complete
open-source experience, instead of providing pre-configured links to
any proprietary solutions to fill in the gaps in the foss stack. I'm
fully prepared to live with gaps in both software and hardware support
to encourage development of open source solutions over proprietary
ones. Even if that project policy impacts the release's overall
userbase popularity because of the incremental annoyance of finding
3rd party repositories... i believe its worth it if the annoyance
factor spurs increased interest in open and distributable
implementations of the missing functionality.

-jef"any news about the gcjwebplugin project of late?"spaleta