On 4/18/06, Victor Skovorodnikov <vic_sk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Would you please elaborate on as to why it is unacceptable? I though > Fedora is, by definitiion, non-commercial. While the Fedora project itself does not monetarily profit from the codebase, the project endeavors to protect the right/freedom of other people to use the sourcecode base as the basis for a commercial endeavor. For example its perfectly acceptable for 3rd party vendors to commercially sell mediasets(with the appropriate warranty) of the fedora core and extras repositories. By including some packages which can not be included in such mediasets, you have greatly complicated vendor involvement. I suggest you become more familiar with the OSI definition of "open source" as a general guiding principle as to what licensing terms are acceptable. http://opensource.org/docs/definition.html Non-commercial clauses fail OSI's "No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor" principle and thus unacceptable. -jef -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
