Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for December 5, 2013
Deadline scheduling: coming soon?
LWN.net Weekly Edition for November 27, 2013
ACPI for ARM?
LWN.net Weekly Edition for November 21, 2013
Yes, at least in the case of the kernel. Other packages may be handled differently.
Red Hat and the GPL
Posted Mar 9, 2011 14:37 UTC (Wed) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458)
This is ludicrous. How can the fact that somebody does a git rebase make that the preferred form for the code suddenly isn't a tarball anymore? Or is they used some other form of VCS, where the end result is always the result of weawing together a changing set of patches?
Preferred form for "building, studying and modifying" just isn't the same as for doing archaeology.
Posted Mar 9, 2011 21:10 UTC (Wed) by branden (subscriber, #7029)
Well-stated. I don't know why so many people keep dragging the VCS issue into things.
The complaint was *not* "Red Hat doesn't make their git trees public!"
Why do people insist on pretending as if it was?
It is possible for Red Hat to distribute the kernel SRPMs in a form which unambiguously satisfied the letter and spirit of the GPL without exposing their git trees to the public. How do we know that? Because until recently, they'd spent years doing it.
People are not asking for the moon here.
Posted Mar 9, 2011 21:36 UTC (Wed) by dark (subscriber, #8483)
However this doesn't seem to apply to the RHEL kernel so it's just hypothetical.
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds