On 24/09/11 19:11, brett lentz wrote: > Even if that's technically legal, it violates the spirit of what Fedora > is all about. > > ---Brett. > > On Sep 24, 2011 1:07 PM, "Tristan Santore" > <tristan.santore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:tristan.santore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: >> On 24/09/11 15:43, Mike McGrath wrote: >>> On Fri, 23 Sep 2011, Kevin Fenzi wrote: >>> >>>> Greetings. >>>> >>>> I finally sat down and poked around with the current version of zarafa >>>> we have setup (7.0.0). >>>> >>>> Some observations: >>>> >>>> * It seems more responsive and nicer than the 6.x versions were. >>>> >>>> * There doesn't seem to be a way to disable features and just show the >>>> calendar that I can figure out. The email part is always there. ;( >>>> However, unless we have it set to send incoming emails there, it >>>> works fine for just sending calendar invites and the like. >>>> >>>> * The ical / caldav feeds seem to be there and working. Took a bit to >>>> find them, but they do work. >>>> >>>> * We can't enable z-push as it's non free, so thats no push for a bunch >>>> of mobile devices. >>>> >>>> * Calendars are per user. There is a group calendar feature, but it >>>> seems to not be available in the free version. >>>> >>>> So, I am thinking that if we don't want to offer mail hosting, zarafa >>>> isn't going to be something we want to support/deploy. >>>> >>>> The only one still getting email into it is Mike. >>>> I don't know if other folks are using the calendar or not, but we >>>> should check that. >>>> >>>> Any further thoughts or conclusions? Or should we set a sunset date? >>>> >>> >>> I demand that Fedora continue to offer and support a mailing solution.... >>> just of me ;-) >>> >>> +1 to the sunset. Let me know when and I'll make arrangements to get my >>> mail sent back to my normal account. >>> >>> -Mike >>> _______________________________________________ >>> infrastructure mailing list >>> infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure >> How about hosting zarafa elsewhere ? In a sane legal zone like the EU! >> >> As long as Fedora doesn't itself host this, its not taking part in >> contributory infringement, I would think. >> >> Regards, >> >> Tristan >> >> -- >> Tristan Santore BSc MBCS >> TS4523-RIPE >> Network and Infrastructure Operations >> InterNexusConnect >> Mobile +44-78-55069812 >> Tristan.Santore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:Tristan.Santore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Former Thawte Notary >> (Please note: Thawte has closed its WoT programme down, >> and I am therefore no longer able to accredit trust) >> >> For Fedora related issues, please email me at: >> TSantore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:TSantore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> _______________________________________________ >> infrastructure mailing list >> infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure > > > > _______________________________________________ > infrastructure mailing list > infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure Using foss service providers does not violate what we are about, and besides, if that was the case then we should also ban our users from mentioning rpmfusion in the help channel, which is preposterous. Just because the United States has decided to have patents on software, which nobody in Fedora agrees with, nor Red Hat for that matter, then you can't ask Europe to enforce such stupidity. What you are saying is, that we cant basically add European service providers to the list of US based service providers we already use. Of course, external providers of free services we use to market Fedora, such as facebook, have also faced patent infringement claims. Also, we would not be hosting it ourselves, we do not violate the principal of having only freely usable software in the distribution. The distribution has nothing to do with obtaining services from a third-party. Of course,, if there was a better option, which we can mass-roll out to allow everyone to work more efficiently together, then great, but people have been banging on about a product we need, and nothing has fit the bill. And, as a contributor, Id like to have the ability to gain access to such collaboration systems, it should be for everyone, not just a select few. Regards, Tristan -- Tristan Santore BSc MBCS TS4523-RIPE Network and Infrastructure Operations InterNexusConnect Mobile +44-78-55069812 Tristan.Santore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Former Thawte Notary (Please note: Thawte has closed its WoT programme down, and I am therefore no longer able to accredit trust) For Fedora related issues, please email me at: TSantore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
