On Wed, 2006-08-30 at 15:47 +0530, Rahul wrote: > Paul W. Frields wrote: > > > > > Frankly, I'm a little surprised, after our previous discussions on > > whether we should pursue FSF endorsement in some fashion, that we would > > wring our hands much about this. We've agreed that openmotif is not > > free. Fedora only ships free software. Rahul, you have said this to > > many people, many times. > > Yes but I have also been telling many people that we should do things in > a way that doesnt affect end users and our contributors. Pretty much > all of the openmotif dependencies in Fedora Core and Extras can be fixed > with lesstif. #3 is disruptive. #1 doesnt make much sense to me since > we havent included libraries in Fedora Core unless we had actual > applications in Fedora Core dependent on them. I agree that #1 makes no sense. > Since there is already support to move all the openmotif dependencies > into Fedora Extras, I dont see why we need to retain openmotif in > Fedora Core. This part I agree with. :-) I think that in this case moving the apps and libs dependent on openmotif to Extras makes sense, which would allow them to join the Extras "rolling release" structure. Thus, when they're fixed, people would be able to upgrade. So you have one of two situations AIUI, and not being a programmer type, I would appreciate corrections where I'm wrong: 1. User has openmotif [+ dependent packages] installed, and upgrades to FC6. The openmotif package stays installed as is, and the dependent packages will pull in lesstif once they are rebuilt and repushed to FE. It's up to the user to remove openmotif unless we obsolete it with lesstif, which seems risky. 2. User has openmotif [+ dependent packages] installed, and installs FC6, expecting to find these packages again during or after installation, and doesn't. This causes grumbling. User drops back to FC5 until he figures out the situation by looking at release notes, FAQ, or ML, and then chooses to either stay with FC5 until we have lesstif replacements for his favorite packages, or he gets openmotif on his own and takes the plunge to FC6. Neither of these situations prevents a third-party repository from picking up openmotif if they're interested, right? > We moved GNOME 1.x libs to Fedora Extras soon after GNUCash got into > the GTK 2.x bandwagon. The current situation isnt very different. Of course it's different. GNOME 1.x libraries are free software by every definition that matters, while openmotif is not. Leaving openmotif in Fedora (no matter where one puts it) and continuing to talk about freedom is just hypocritical. > The dumping argument is a red herring. Anyway, I am not going to waste > more bandwidth on this. If you guys believe that dumping out all the > applications now makes more sense, go ahead. IIRC you were a proponent of engaging in a license review for Core. It was a good idea then, and it still is. Obviously this kind of situation was one of the possible outcomes of that review, although of course none of us are thrilled by it. A concomitant plan for dealing with the potential fallout would have been good, but in its absence, we simply have to deal honestly and forthrightly with the fallout. I don't see how we can rationally defend maintaining non-free software in the Fedora, anywhere. As an aside, I think the Extras folks deserve a big pat on the back because it's unlikely, given the required license review they've had in place, that Extras is harboring any more of these problems. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Project Board: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board Fedora Docs Project: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly
