Hi
"The article revealed that many distributions' maintainers were
erroneously assuming that they did not need to provide source
repositories for packages they did not modify, so long as the original
upstream distribution did provide the source code. This responsibility
is by no means new, but seems to have been widely overlooked. David
Turner, GPL compliance officer at the Free Software Foundation,
suggested that these distros might come into compliance by making some
arrangement with the upstream supplier.
Turner's suggestion was rejected by Max Spevack, Fedora Board chair,
partly because of the possible expense, but chiefly because it might
encourage forking and leave the upstream distribution open to legal
liability for the downstream one."
http://trends.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/07/07/2044245&from=rss
Not sure how a agreement with upstream would encourage forking. Max, can
you expand on that?
Needless to say, a better working arrangement with derivative
distributions is pretty important for Fedora. We have a number of Fedora
derivatives out there that could be doing interesting modifications that
we need to look at.
Rahul
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
