On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:41:09 -0500, Christopher Aillon <caillon@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > We want to stay as close to upstream as possible Thats great... but you can do that using the iceweasel option. But when there is a disagreement over a patch and there will be at some point.... using the non-ioeweasel options will prevent Fedora Core developers from being able to apply the patch without upstream approval. This a maintence burden... and it will happen at some point. If you have to keep getting approval for each patch you want to apply.... you are bound to run into a situation where upstream disagrees and you sit arguing about it for a month to keep the branding agreement in place. "As close as possible" doesn't mean upstream will approve of all the changes. Instead of burning that disagreement bridge when we get to it... how about we avoid the problem altogether and choose the iceweasel option because its the most flexible. > I'd like however to work together with the Mozilla Foundation rather > than against them. Obviously, they want us as a distributor and we want > to distribute their software. Using the iceweasel option doesn't prevent you or any other fedora developer from working with upstream as much as possible. But disagreements do happen and I'd rather see fedora packaging things free of trademark licensing requirements that impact the developers ability to patch and maintain what is shipping inside Core, as much as possible. How much fun would it be if the linux kernel was packaged in a way that demanded upstream approval of every patch before it was applied to keep a branding agreement in place to prevent having to rename the package and executables? That would be pretty unfun. > > Are you talking about the upstream source or the fedora srpm here? > > Upstream source. Can you find a way to enforce the same sort of rebuilding policy for the fedora srpm so that anyone rebuilding and patching the mozilla srpm has to use 'magic' to get the trademark protected marks? Red Hat has an agreement with mozilla, but downstream community members using fedora's srpms do not. It seems inappropriate to hand fedora community srpms that short-circuit the trademark protections that the upstream source have built in to prevent people from casually rebuilding a package that is infringing on mozilla's marks. -jef"Red Hat shouldn't be relying on special relationship agreements to produce patched versions of anything in fedora"spaleta
