On Mon, 2007-11-05 at 16:51 +1300, Vladimir Kosovac wrote: > seth vidal wrote: > > On Sun, 2007-11-04 at 20:14 -0500, Christopher Blizzard wrote: > >> seth vidal wrote: > >>> http://lwn.net/Articles/256974/ > >>> > >>> Btw - in the interview they mention further integration of the webstore > >>> into codeina/codecbuddy. If it starts looking like we're pushing closed > >>> source software then that, imo, is when codeina gets dumped out of the > >>> distribution. > >>> > >>> I don't care about needles and I don't want to ween the addicts off. > >> Pushing or making available? Or making it easy? > >> > > > > The precedent is what I'm most worried about: > > > > we're okay having sales items for closed-source codecs in our distro > > what about drivers? > > what about closed-source application software? opera? matlab? > > > > Seriously, at what point do we draw the line and what criteria do we use > > to distinguish one item from the other? > > > If I may - wasn't that line drawn quite a while ago, by stating Fedora > goals? > > Codec buddy inclusion does not leave a bad taste (although this is very > arguable) in the commercial context - the fact that it directly links to > and encourages the use of non-Free stuff does. > fair enough. codec buddy as implemented in codeina and as merged upstream includes direct links to fluendo's non-free software for sale. -sv _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
