Bill Nottingham wrote:
Hans de Goede (j.w.r.degoede@xxxxxx) said:
Someone building an OS on top of it may not qualify for the
'normal access fees' test.
Someone building an OS on top would be in trouble with any freely
distributable content, as freely distributable != being able to build on
top of it. This thus seems a non argument as the guidelines talk about
"to freely distribute" wich clear != "to build a(n) XXXX on top of it"
Huh?
If you can't build XXX on top of it and distribute it, that's not
freely distributable.
If you build on top of you are using / modifying / extending, In essence
you're creating a derative work see GPL vs LGPL for libraries. No where
in the guidelines it says (for firmware / content) that derative works
have to be allowed, it only says freely distributable.
<snip going offtopic / making the discussion larger then soley the quake
shareware distribtion license >
Regards,
Hans
--
fedora-extras-list mailing list
fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
