On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 13:01:40 -0400 (EDT)
Seth Vidal <skvidal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
Then our opions diverge: I think it should be a hard show stopper
criterion.
There should not be any room for any "cripple ware" in Fedora nor
should Fedora be a stage for "closed source loaders".
I think I agree.
This is just like shipping a package with an intentionally missing
dependency. We wouldn't allow shipping yum if rpm were missing,
right?
this sounds the same to me.
So, how about some other cases instead of just kmods:
- Client apps that are free and acceptable for fedora, but a server app
that is not.
EXAMPLE: mpd (in rpmfusion) and all the various mpd clients that are
all in fedora.
- Library app thats free, but only non free things link against it so
far.
EXAMPLE: libvdpau
- Package that is free an interfaces with a non free server's data:
EXAMPLE: dbxml-perl
- Package that is free, but the kernel part of it's currently not
working (although planned to be back and great work is being done on
it):
EXAMPLE: xen
- Package that is free and acceptable for fedora, but requires a non
free service to function:
EXAMPLE: perl-Net-Amazon-EC2
Where does the black and white line come in here?
Or is it shades of grey?
We've allowed pretty much all of the cases where you could communicate
over the network to something else.
but we're not talking about over-the-network communication here.
-sv
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
