Bill Nottingham wrote:
Rahul Sundaram (sundaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) said:
I had the impression that it was about linking to the repository package
directly instead of just the website? If even linking to the website itself
from a dialog box in codeina is not ok with Red Hat Legal,
It's not. What part of 'you may not link to the repository in the software'
is hard to understand?
The "repository" might mean either a website that hosts the repository
or a .repo or repo release rpm file. There might be a legal difference
in between these. I am merely asking for some clarifications.
update http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/CodecBuddy or in the second dialog
where it lists the Fluendo codecs, we could introduce a new link that says
"click here for free alternatives" or something similar. Is that ok?
Again, that second dialog is in the software itself, populated from the
XML file.
Click here for free alternatives could lead to some page in the Fedora
wiki which then would lead to the third party repository. I don't know
the implementation details enough to know whether it is possible
currently. If not, it could probably be modified to do this. The
question I am asking is really whether we want to do this or not in the
first place.
Rahul
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
