On Fri, 2011-11-25 at 14:24 -0500, Matt Rose wrote: > Ah, and the license restriction canard. I was actually expecting this > one. If Fedora can't distribute this software because of license > restrictions, how come RPMFusion can, and Ubuntu can, and SuSE can, > and, and, and. Different goals, and others not caring about breaking laws, or not being bound by the same laws, not caring about sticking to certain licenses, exposing users to patent encumbrances and so on and so forth, versus a distro which intends to only include free software. The latter one can be very important to some people (whether that be developers or users). If you ever get threatened with a computer software audit, you'll have nothing to worry about. Some distros run the risk, by including some things, just hoping that they'll get away with it. Others have done deals with the devil, to be allowed do so. Deals which can come back to bite them, later on. You're not going to get far arguing that Fedora should do something, if it has a goal that it actually should not. Such removal of things like MP3 playback are not casual, nor mere omissions. -- [tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686 Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
