Re: Fedora/RH policies sometimes suck

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On 4/9/07, linuxmaillists@xxxxxxxxxxx <linuxmaillists@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Monday 09 April 2007, Andy Green wrote:
> linuxmaillists@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > No it has something to do with the function not being
> > open source or something like that. It was on another
> > mailing
> Patent threat from MSFT... see this FUD article from
> 2004:
> ''OpenOffice: A legal Trojan horse--but for whom?''
> Don't blame Redhat for this, they are doing what they
> have to do.  As you point out it's not so hard if you
> want to install the stock version on top of the vast
> amount of other packages and security updates Redhat are
> giving us for free.
> -Andy

I wasn't blaming any one I was just very frustrated to find
out that some functionality that I could have used and will
now was taken out of the version packaged with Fedora.

I have to say though, I find it curious that drag and drop auto
incrementing was holding up a project.

It would be nice to know when Fedora strips functionality
out of packages in the distro so we can make the choice to
install the original package and not the Fedora stripped
version.  I understand why they do it.  I also like to know
about it so I can override them when I think I need too.
That is my only issue.

Okay. Well I mean we all know it is done, we just don't keep track of
the specifics. I suppose that is what you're asking for.

Now back to my original question does any one know where I
can find information that shows what packages Fedora has
stripped because of questionable legal issues?

The closest thing is the packaging guidlines, no specific list exist.
Stripping out such things isn't often possible, this is the first i've
heard of this.

Fedora Core 6 and proud

[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux