sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
[SM-Discuss] licensing in the kernel and when not to follow upstream
- From: seth AT swoolley.homeip.net
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: [SM-Discuss] licensing in the kernel and when not to follow upstream
- Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2008 05:19:55 -0800
Do we have a document anywhere that says when not to follow upstream?
http://sourcemage.org/SourceMage/SocialContract
Item 1 says, "never include non-free in core"
The Linux kernel has non-free items:
http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3787736/Proprietary+Firmware+and+the+Pursuit+of+a+Free+Kernel.htm
I suggest those items may have to go into z-rejected, even for firmware.
Other times we don't follow upstream:
FHS violations and INSTALL_ROOTification
optional patches queried default to no
An alternative is to make the linux kernel query for the patch to remove
the blobs, defaulted to "remove" on the iso.
Section 1 of our Social Contract is pretty clear that we should be
following the FSF guidelines for a free distro "core", if not
being entirely free (hence, z-rejected).
Seth
- [SM-Discuss] licensing in the kernel and when not to follow upstream, seth, 11/29/2008
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.