Jesse Keating wrote:
As part of a continuing effort to make derivative distributions of
Fedora easier, we're making the path names within the tree a bit more
generic. Instead of os/Fedora/<packages> the path will now be
os/Packages/<packages>.
This seems like a good time to bring up this question regarding
derivative distributions-
Is it okay - (and I'm pretty sure the current position is yes, but I'd
like reassurance, and ideally a wiki/faq entry if none exists already)
- to include the fedora-release rpm (not fedora-logos) in a derivative
distribution?
If not, what I am more specifically interested in, is the fedora rpm gpg
key, and the yum configurations that point at fedora servers.
In some sense, this facilitates derivative distributions 'leeching'
resources from fedora. But it seems like this is currently allowed, and
given the moves to encourage derivative distros, I suspect fedora does
not have a problem with this.
Then the final question of course would be, since derivative distros of
this nature are using binaries actually built by fedora, will fedora be
willing to go the extra mile and offer written assurance to keep the
source rpms available for 3 years, or whatever the whole fallout from
the gpl-derivative-distro thread of recent history was.
I mean, it seems plain silly to force derivative distros, that are using
binaries compiled and provided by fedora, to maintain a mirror of the
source rpms. Especially if as above, the yum configs in the derivative
distros are pointing at fedora servers anyway.
Thoughts? Pointers to existing wiki/faqs that -
google://"fedora derivative distributions policy"
didn't make utterly obvious?
Thanks,
-dmc
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
