...On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 11:43:00 -0500 (CDT), Rex Dieter <rdieter@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Gregory Leblanc wrote:
Note that this is intended for Extras, *not* Core. By "Fedora", if you meant "Fedora Core", then I'd agree with you 100%.
I think you make too fine a distinction between Core and Extras, especially in this case, where the licensing issue directly impacts the ability of a package maintainer to do the right thing when it
I think the best way to look at Fedora Extras as an extention of Core not as something distinctly different moving forward. Extras is not and will not be a dumping ground for unmaintainable packages.
I respectfully disagree a bit here. I have no problem as package maintainer waiting for bugs to be fixed upstream, and that this waiting does not make the package "unmaintainable".
OTOH, I guess it all boils down to fedora.redhat.com's definition of "open source", as referred to in point 2 on:
http://fedora.redhat.com/about/objectives.html
If pine's license doesn't meet this definition, then I would have to concede that pine has no place in in Fedora.
-- Rex
