On 7/26/07, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I'm more than willing to take on additional helpers to maintain this > > license registry. I'm very willing to alter the license identifiers to > > make they more simplistic, but without that baseline standard, it won't > > be possible to predictably track license data from packages. > Whatfor? Somebody from the "dark circles" at RH ordered you to do so and > because of the GPLv3 had been introduced. I call this overreaction and > hysteria ... > Ralf, I guess my cover as being the head of the Black Blood Red Hat conspiracy has been found out. I started this effort a long time ago when I was trying to figure out why a non-OSS license package in Fedora was listed as Distributable.. I began a quick listing of packages, but had other issues come up (the moon was in the 6th house, and the its conjunction with Ceres opened a small door for me to commune with my masters). Spot took it up because he thought it was something to be done. You have seen through my ruse of using this to help move the stars into the proper place for R'yleh to rise again and my dark masters to rule once more. It was so much easier to cause the pain and torment of developers than trying to find virgins to sacrifice these days. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
