Hello Michael, On Thu, 2004-07-22 at 15:35, Michael Tiemann wrote: > Moreover, it was my opinion that there were many important contributors > who would be uninterested in making Fedora their preferred platform for > development if we incorporated proprietary software into the core. I > argued that it was better to give people the option to package and > maintain proprietary software on top of a free core than to exclude > people who reject non-free software. I assume you will also address the issue whether non free or "semi free" software can be distributed from Fedora Extras and if so how. And how to integrate other solutions. I think Jeff summed it up nicely in his last post. > I am trying to finish a draft statement for discussion on Fedora > policies and processes. This draft is /not/ an official Red Hat > position (at least not yet). Any chance that with the help of a few other Red Hat developers (and of course agreement from management) such a draft can be turned into an official proposal for discussion? Do you have concrete plans in this direction? > I also second the notion of creating fedora-legal as a place to have > licensing, trademark, and other legal-related discussions. For strictly legal issues this is probably a good idea. But the discussion about which licenses to accept has practical implications so we shouldn't segregate the issues too strictly. Leonard. -- mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research
