On Fri, 2006-05-19 at 10:26 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 02:09:49PM -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote: > > > any comments on > > > http://www.sun.com/smi/Press/sunflash/2006-05/sunflash.20060516.4.xml ? > > > I understand this as an indicator, that the Sun JDK and JRE should now > > > be distributable via Fedora Core or Extras? If so, I would very much > > > like to see this. > > This pretty much kills it: > > 2c. ``you do not combine, configure or distribute the Software to run in > > conjunction with any additional software that implements the same or > > similar functionality or APIs as the Software'' > > The "it's not open source" kills it for Fedora. > > But for "non-free", I don't believe this is a problem. I think the people on > the JPackage list who are concerned about this are misinterpreting -- > remember, licenses are written in legalese, which is formed from English > words but where the meaning of certain terms is determined by heaps of case > law and precedent, not necessarily by the dictionary. > > My assumption, given that Sun people say that this clause does not prevent > distribution of the JDK _alongside_ GCJ etc., is that people are reading > the phrase "in conjunction with" more strongly than it should be. A more > narrow reading indicates that you can't use the Sun JVM with GNU Classpath, > but you can use and distribute them both _not_ in conjunction. > > But really, a lawyer needs to answer this question. > and no matter what it is off topic for this list. sun's java is not free software. It will NOT be in fedora provided that it continues to be closed-source - no matter how much they let us redistribute it. so we can stop discussing it. -sv -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
