On 07/01/14 08:27 PM, Always Learning wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2014-01-07 at 20:14 -0500, Stephen Harris wrote:
>
>> If the software was
>> subject to EAR then it was subject to it regardless of a web page
>> stating it.
>
> [EAR = USA's Export Administration Regulations]
>
> How would a mere downloader from a mirror, or a purchaser of a Centos
> disk or even a beneficiary of a free Centos disk at a Centos event
> beware of USA law restrictions and understand the full legal
> implications of USA law ?
>
> Its reminiscent of the PGP farce from nearly 20? years ago.
>
> With Google slowly removing, or not updating, the open source bits of
> Android and replacing them by closed sources, will the same commercial
> strategy emerge from Red Hat into Centos ?
RH has a long history of being a benevolent supporter of 3rd party
projects under their umbrella. Look at Fedora, Gluster, KVM, etc.
What RH did was guarantee the long term health and sustainability of the
CentOS community. They've provided that same community access to
tremendous resources, both technical and human, to grow and maintain the
project.
Red Hat's benefit is that they help grow the community of EL users. A
very many paid RHEL users got their start with CentOS. They've given
CentOS instant corporate credibility that will help grow that
"incubator" user base even further, increasing the pool of users who
might one day grow into needing commercial support. They're building the
foundation for their future customer base.
I am very confident that this will prove to be a very good thing for
both CentOS and RH.
--
Digimer
Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/
What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without
access to education?
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
