Valent Turkovic wrote:
On 9/11/07, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Jesse Keating wrote:
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 20:02:40 +0000 (UTC)
Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Rahul Sundaram <sundaram <at> fedoraproject.org> writes:
Thanks for this split. Hopefully we will able to link to the free
part from within Fedora.
Unfortunately I don't think you will be able to. The stuff in the
free part (or most of it, at least) is going to be exactly the stuff
which Legal is most uncomfortable with: Free Software, but
patent-encumbered in the US.
And really, if we could reference it, then why the crap couldn't we
just package it in our repo?
There is a lot of differences between pointing to the repository and
including the packages directly as I already explained in Fedora
Advisory Board list so I won't rehash all the arguments again now.
Please read the releated threads if you missed it. In short, it is not
possible to include patent-encumbered packages directly in the
repository as long as it hosted in US. Pointing to it might very well be
possible.
Rahul
Yes! I cought a bit late on this thread but I can't be happier!
I started a threat that asked this exact question: why doesn't fedora
link to external repositories after users agreeing to some sort of
ULA.
What is the update on this topic?
We are still waiting on legal input.
Rahul
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
