On 06/29/2009 10:42 AM, Jon Stanley wrote: > As Ajax said, the contingency plan would be "nuke from orbit", just as > it is for any legally objectionable software in Fedora. I'm not sure what the time horizon is between Fedora Legal DEFCON levels, but the mono project's retreat plan is to invent-around, then break compatibility as needed (with mounting prior-art challenges as a follow-up). So one might conceivably see a more pure mono emerge shortly after such a challenge. At least for the libraries. Microsoft claims certain of its patents are _essential_ to implement C# and the CLI (mono links to a letter from Jim [mumble] from Microsoft in their FAQ). OSNews is currently attempting to engage Microsoft in learning the terms of their RAND license under ECMA rules. Last I checked they were 30 days in with no response. -Bill (writing as somebody who hasn't ruled out hacking up a 'Conflicts: mono' bogon RPM, for insurance purposes) -- Bill McGonigle, Owner Work: 603.448.4440 BFC Computing, LLC Home: 603.448.1668 http://www.bfccomputing.com/ Cell: 603.252.2606 Twitter, etc.: bill_mcgonigle Page: 603.442.1833 Email, IM, VOIP: bill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Blog: http://blog.bfccomputing.com/ VCard: http://bfccomputing.com/vcard/bill.vcf -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
