On Nov 21, 2007, at 9:02 AM, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
Personally I am opposed to trying to find clever ways to not needing to host the source (rpms). Finding ways to do anything different from *just making the sources available online* for a period of time is asking for trouble; It should work, but what if it doesn't -or fails half-way? How does investing in a couple of discs weigh (each release?) against the potential legal liability of losing anything because in the past you thought you needed some 'clever way' to make sources available.
There are a lot of things that we've wanted to do that this particular requirement makes difficult. We're looking for ways to do it that scale and still comply with the license. For example, if you have to keep around a source rpm for anything that you might have possibly ever might have distributed it makes for an explosion of disk space. (Scratch builds? Personal builds?) However, sources and patches don't explode anywhere near as quickly and if that can be carefully archived in a way that makes the source easy to get, then we're doing more than just complying with the license.
--Chris _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
