On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 04:37:22PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Ewan Mac Mahon (ewan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) said: > > This sort of decision is always going to be a balance; on the one hand > > there are clearly real costs to Fedora in having a blanket ban on flags, > > and on the other we have (according to spot[1]) "no specific legal issue > > at this time". > > They specifically stated that it may/will prevent Fedora from being > available or acceptable in some countries. That's not insignificant. > I'm not sure I see that in the fesco trac ticket, but even so, I don't think it necessarily follows from that that we should be stripping flags. There are two basic questions (I think): - Will stripping the flags make Fedora acceptable everywhere? We know that various governments doesn't get on with certain flags, but how do they feel about tor, gnupg, sword, or FreeCiv's text-based references to Tibet? While the flags may be unacceptable, it's not clear that they're the only thing that's unacceptable, and there's no advantage in stripping the flags if Fedora remains off-limits in these countries for other reasons. - Even if a no flags policy would suffice to make Fedora acceptable in certain countries, then is that benefit worth the costs in increases package maintanance overhead, and removal of software from Fedora, particularly given the relative ease of creating localised spins or derivatives. My guess is that simply removing flags isn't enough to make Fedora acceptable the world over, and my opinion is that the benefits it does bring are outweighed by the costs. Ewan
Attachment:
pgpZC7wqWvSsJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
