>>>>> "Paul" == Paul Nasrat <pauln@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Paul> On Mon, Dec 29, 2003 at 11:32:37AM -0500, Edward C. Bailey wrote:
>> It seems that the best way to end this email is to pose a question:
>>
>> Where do we go from here?
Paul> I'd like to throw another log in the fire as it were :)
Well, I hadn't dressed for flames this morning, but what the hell -- go for
it... :-)
Paul> Myself and some others have produced patches to update maximum rpm,
Paul> which is under OPL - but with only the book format restriction (these
Paul> patches are currently in HEAD). I'm doing this without exposure to
Paul> Eric Foster-Johnson's book, btw.
Paul> What would be the views on carrying on this work (fixing up pgp
Paul> section next on my todo).
Well, since I noticed you ping'ed me on irc, I assume you're asking what
Red Hat's position (or mine, me being the author and all) would be on work
being continued on Maximum RPM.
The reason Maximum RPM was licensed under the OPL without the "substantive
modifications" restriction was precisely to permit this kind of work to be
done on it, so I can't think of a situation in which I (or Red Hat) would
have an issue with what you're doing...
Ed
--
Ed Bailey Red Hat, Inc. http://www.redhat.com/
