On Wed, 2008-07-09 at 15:40 -0700, Anthony Green wrote: > Regarding the packaging for mingw tools in Fedora, Axel Thimm wrote: > > In this case I don't see the benefits for Fedora. I just see more Open > > Source being hijacked for a non Open Source operating system. > > > It's an interesting question, but here's my two part counter-argument: > > 1. Our goal should be to benefit users of Fedora, and not just Fedora > itself. In this case, the packager is simply proposing to include tools > that will benefit developers who have the misfortune of needing to > target the windows operating system. If I found myself in that > unfortunate position, I would be very happy to find that Fedora packaged > a nice set of fully FOSS tools for me to use. > > 2. The Open Source definition talks about discrimination against fields > of endeavor. Strictly speaking, it's talking about discrimination > encoded into software licenses. However, I like to think that the > Fedora Project should adopt this principal in a more general way, since > it is in keeping with the Open Source philosophy of freedom. But you're > asking that Fedora not include a collection of fully FOSS tools because > you don't like what people are going to use them for. Do we really want > to set this precedent? I hope not. Especially when I find it pretty easy to s/MinGW/Python/ in this thread and the arguments haven't really broken down badly yet. -- Paul W. Frields gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://paul.frields.org/ - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
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
