On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 08:40:03AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > ...snip... > > IMHO, it feels wrong to call this it's own foundation. A foundation is > a core value of our community, and this seems like a harsh reality we > have to live with. I also have a hard time envisioning functionality at the level of the other core values. But I certainly think it's important. Fedora has carved out specific space for functionality in areas like kernel firmware in the past. Those were the right decisions to ensure users can make use of the platform in a world we don't control (e.g. where firmware is an increasingly key part of OEM TTM strategy). > I guess I would prefer to have the 'freedom' foundation clarified some > rather than adding this as a foundation. +1. > I guess it depends on where we draw the line how we clarify too. Is it > anything remote is allowed to be nonfree? Or anything thats a client > that interacts with something non free? I think forcing our users to eschew nonfree web services increasingly sidelines the Fedora platform. For example, making it harder for developers to use preferred services like github (operational) or Twitter (social/advertising) doesn't help Fedora improve as a hospitable platform. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
