On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 10:20:17AM -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > I've both read that page, and linked to it further down in this thread. > Yes, I believe that Canonical's implementation is a GPL violation, but it > doesn't need to be. So long as the source is in a separate package, and > it's packaged as a kmod, it wouldn't be a GPL violation. It's worth > considering, in my opinion, whether or not it'd be available for RHEL. It > wouldn't be the first package RHEL doesn't have, but Fedora does. :) The Conservancy page does address source distribution as well, and they (as well as Red Hat's lawyers) have a different conclusion. -- Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Fedora Project Leader _______________________________________________ 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
