On Tuesday, October 15, 2019 7:01:49 PM MST mcatanzaro@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 12:19 AM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@xxxxxxxxx> > > wrote: > > By actively offering the proprietary Chrome to the users instead of > > explaining the above, you are actually pointing them towards using > > proprietary software instead of Free Software for no reason. > > I think you're probably right that people mainly want Chrome for the > multimedia support. But well, surely you are well aware that we'll > never be able to point to the rpmfusion codecs packages in any official > location. I know it's very frustrating, but the legal team is just > trying to protect Red Hat (and Fedora). It would be helpful to please > keep your argumentation within the realm of the legal constraints we > have to respect. > > Michael If we can't point to that, but *can* point to *proprietary software* "in any official location", we're obviously doing something wrong. Protecting Fedora is not achieved by recommending proprietary software. -- John M. Harris, Jr. Splentity _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
