2006/4/20, Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 20:19 +0200, Rudolf Kastl wrote: > > > > but its still derived from fedora isnt it? distcc is hanging idle in > > bugzilla for ages :) > > someone finish the review. > > > > No, because (as Max forgot to mention) the Based on Fedora must be based > on the Binary packages, not rebuilds of the source packages. No > published Binary, can't use it. > > -- > Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) > Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) > GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub) > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) > > iD8DBQBER9GC4v2HLvE71NURAuNaAJ9wuKem64SyF0ADSH9uyxt4khiRgACgkyEy > /f7+cbIOoFFKRLNGYMXOUNQ= > =U6nE > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > -- > Fedora-marketing-list mailing list > Fedora-marketing-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list > > id have to remove all art and branding etc... ok... but then again calling it "derived of fedora" is legal? i am still just curious... sorry for keeping on asking the same question. is only "fork of fedora" legal then? -- Fedora-marketing-list mailing list Fedora-marketing-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
