On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 20:08 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > > I'm wondering what you guys think about changing the tilt of Fedora from > > open source to free software. Namely, saying that the license should > > meet the free software definition ( > > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html ) and then mentioning that > > OSI-certified licenses (with the exception of the Reciprocal Public > > License, which we're going to reevaluate) are a good list, as well as > > the free software licenses that are listed on the FSF website. > > > > The goal is to make Fedora a distribution that the FSF can positively > > endorse. I think we're really close. Any reason to not try to go all > > the way? > > Do we have an idea of what we would need to drop to be completely free > software definition compliant? I think the main thing is declaring it to be free software ourselves. We miss the mark by not actually saying it explicitly. > What would we lose? > > I guess a few rpm queries on license should work. > what licenses are we looking for? I've only found one problematic license (the Reciprocal Public License), and I seriously doubt that license is attached to any software we actually ship. Now, it could be that I'm monstrously in the dark, and that we ship non- free drivers with Fedora, but I don't think so... M
