I don't get it [LWN.net]

I don't get it

Posted Mar 20, 2008 2:12 UTC (Thu) by mdomsch (subscriber, #5920)
In reply to: I don't get it by pr1268
Parent article: Fedora's advice on GPL compliance

1) they're distributing under 3a) when you get both simultaneously. With this, the publisher's
obligation is complete.

3) Exactly because of the added cost, we made this recommendation.  We could double our
production and shipping costs to produce CD/DVDs with source code as well as the binary media,
but we know that at shows and events, most people are interested in getting the binary media,
and wouldn't want the source code media.  We would wind up throwing away a lot of source code
media, so, we incurred added expense, and have created more waste, for no tangible gain.

If in practice our Ambassadors are overwhelmed with requests for source code media at events,
we can reconsider this approach.

(Log in to post comments)

I don't get it

Posted Mar 20, 2008 23:29 UTC (Thu) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link]

They either need to supply the source or the written offer. I suggest that Fedora just make the "written offer" process very easy; say, a HOW_TO_GET_SOURCE_CODE file in the top level directory of the CD.

I don't get it

Posted Mar 21, 2008 0:17 UTC (Fri) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]

Written offer under 3b) has the problem Matt Domsch already cited which is a 3 year time
period for which you have to maintain the equivalent source packages. When exactly the clock
starts ticking for the 3 year time period is fuzzy and is a considerable risk if adversely
interpreted. 

Fedora Project having to retain all the binary and source packages for every update it has
every released (since different spins have different package sets and package versions) which
is a pretty huge amount of storage space considering the release and update cycle. A
comprehensive solution is being worked out on that problem as indicated in the announcement. 

https://fedorahosted.org/correspondingsource/