Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 8:10 AM, Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 2008-04-14 at 08:55 -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
One use case that comes to mind: someone doing a spin that can't meet the
> Fedora criteria for still being called Fedora. In theory, simply replacing
> fedora-release and fedora-logos is sufficient, but in practice, Fedora (and/or
> Red Hat) shows up a few other places as well. In gnome, System->About Fedora
> still shows up, and System->About Fedora still says "Distributor: Red Hat,
> Inc." (this one probably ought to say "Fedora Project" for Fedora...). In web
> pages, the apache identifier string is still "Apache/2.2.8 (Fedora)", and I'm
> sure there are probably other cases as well.
Well, there is a difference in saying that we got these packages from
Fedora, and "We are Fedora", and this could wind up being a lengthy
discussion with the RH legal team.
Where the problem comes up is where a project is not saying they are
Fedora/Red Hat/etc but the packages say they are.. and where that line
is where lawyers get lots of money :).
Either way, sounds like it's more a fedora-legal issue, and outside the
jurisdiction of fedora packaging guidelines.
-- Rex
--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
