On 12/23/05, Thomas Vander Stichele <thomas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Also, when was the last time that in a traditional closed software offer > you could see the source, make changes to it, submit the changes, and > get legal use out of your changes by using the next version of the > binary that gets released ? As i've mentioned elsewhere... the inability to patch as needed downstream without upstream authorization is probably a deal breaker without invoking the rights of downstream rebuilders who want to use Fedora sources. A Fedora maintainer would need to have the flexibility and authority to patch for security/compatibility on a timescale faster than upstream might be able to respond. A requirement for any patches to be submitted back to upstream isn't unreasonable to me. But having to wait for upstream to formally bless them and re-incorporate them is going to be a maintenance burden. This I believe is one of problems which keeps pine out of Fedora. -jef -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
