Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, John Summerfield <debian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
Providing the script which the GPL appears to require would solve the
problem raised by so many.
The GPL does not require that because the collection is not under the
GPL (a good bit of the software in a given RHEL or FC distrobution isn't
under the GPL; some of it is even GPL-incompatible).
??
LICENSE AGREEMENT
FEDORA(TM) CORE 4
This agreement governs the download, installation or use of the
Software (as defined below) and any updates to the Software,
regardless of the delivery mechanism. The Software is a collective
work under U.S. Copyright Law. Subject to the following terms, Fedora
Project grants to the user ("User") a license to this collective work
pursuant to the GNU General Public License. By downloading,
and so on.
However, the necessary tools are included in the anaconda-runtime
package. It isn't always highly-documented (RTFSource), but last I
checked, the GPL doesn't require that (or a bunch of code, GNU included,
would have to be recalled).
Individual components of a collation can and do have their own licences.
I'm not talking about those licences, they're only relevant to the
extent they permit (or prohibit) their individual inclusiion in the
collation.
Because FC4, and AFAICR all previsous FCs and RHLs, is distributed under
the terms of the GPL, users are entitled to make modified versions and
distribute those, also under the terms of the GPL.
While reading the source is, in principle, possible, it doesn't
constitute suitable documentation. One could, in principle (and assuming
access) discover how to use Windows by reading its source code, but few
would find it an appropriate way to do so. One should not need to be a
capable python programmer in order to use Anaconda to build modified
versions of Fedora Core.
--
Cheers
John
-- spambait
1aaaaaaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Z1aaaaaaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Tourist pics http://portgeographe.environmentaldisasters.cds.merseine.nu/
do not reply off-list
