| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Replace one GPL-questionable distro with another GPL-questionable distro ?Replace one GPL-questionable distro with another GPL-questionable distro ?Posted Nov 29, 2006 10:23 UTC (Wed) by khim (subscriber, #9252)In reply to: Replace one GPL-questionable distro with another GPL-questionable distro ? by mdomsch Parent article: Who is being divisive?
Exactly. When licensing questions are raised about Fedora - RedHat answers them and/or fixes them. When the same happens with SUSE or Ubuntu... leaders talk about commitment to open source path - but don't address the issue directly...
Instead Shuttleworth points out that nobody sued them for GPL violation (so far) so it's Ok to continue with it and even expand it... How it's differend from Novell's stance ?
(Log in to post comments)
Replace one GPL-questionable distro with another GPL-questionable distro ? Posted Nov 29, 2006 19:54 UTC (Wed) by aj (subscriber, #39001) [Link] Look at openSUSE 10.2. Similar to Fedora we have decided to not ship cdrecord with the broken license. We use wodim instead which does not have the license problem. We do care about licenses. Please show me examples in 10.2 where we're not.
|
|
||||||||||||