On 06/24/2009 04:24 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > 1. First. What would be acceptable? Anything under a acceptable license > to Fedora? So, I can make a 100MB package of all the pictures I have > taken of my dogs as long as the license is ok? And can update it weekly > as I take new ones? Well, acceptable license is only one of the points here, but in your specific scenario, I suppose it would be okay. > 2. Is content thats under a Fedora acceptable license, but can't be > read/used by any free tools acceptable? Ie, could someone package a > flash movie? IMHO, the answer is no. From: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Code_Vs_Content "The rule is this: If the content enhances the OS user experience, then the content is OK to be packaged in Fedora. This means, for example, that things like: fonts, themes, clipart, and wallpaper are OK." Content that has no way to be used on Fedora doesn't have the possibility of enhancing the OS user experience. However, your example isn't a good one, as Fedora does include a flash player, so flash video probably would be fine (assuming it works with the Fedora included flash implementations). > 3. Is rpm the right format for this content? Perhaps it would be better > to get people working on some kind of application/viewer thing that > could hit the various CC content and search and download it easily for > Fedora folks? Why should we package and duplicate this content for just > Fedora users? That's a good question. I'll leave it to more qualified people to answer, however, there is precedence for packaging up content in Fedora in RPM. > 4. How would we package some content. Ie, random pictures, or clip art, > or movies. If multiple things in fedora can use them, would they go > into some kind of /usr/share/CC-STUFF/ dir? or what? Also a good question. A tiered hierarchy seems sane, along the lines of /usr/share/pixmaps, e.g. /usr/share/books. > 5. What about content thats licensed ok, but is > Obscene/Adult/Objectionable/Gross? Who decides those cases? Is there > any review of content? Against what guidelines? quoting again from the Code Vs Content section: "Content still has to be reviewed for inclusion. It must have an open source compatible license, must not be legally questionable. In addition, there are several additional restrictions for content: * Content must not be pornographic, or contain nudity, whether animated, simulated, or photographed. There are better places on the Internet to get porn. * Content should not be offensive, discriminatory, or derogatory. If you're not sure if a piece of content is one of these things, it probably is. * All content is subject to review by FESCo, who has the final say on whether or not it can be included. Some examples of content which is permissable: * Package documentation or help files * Clipart for use in office suites * Background images (non-offensive, discriminatory, with permission to freely redistribute) * Fonts (under an open source license, with no ownership/legal concerns) * Game levels are not considered content, since games without levels would be non functional. * Sound or graphics included with the source tarball that the program or theme uses (or the documentation uses) are acceptable. * Game music or audio content is permissible, as long as the content is freely distributable without restriction, and the format is not patent encumbered. * Example files included with the source tarball are not considered content. Some examples of content which are not permissable: * Comic book art files * Religious texts * mp3 files (patent encumbered) If you are unsure if something is considered approved content, ask on fedora-devel-list." Hope that helps, ~spot -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
