On Qua, 2014-01-29 at 11:22 +0100, Alec Leamas wrote:
On 1/29/14, RPM Fusion Bugzilla <noreply(a)rpmfusion.org> wrote:
> --- Comment #38 from Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com> 2014-01-29 08:56:22
> CET ---
> (In reply to comment #30)
> Less legal/policy concerns but will give more work to develop.
Not necessarily. See spot's comment in comment #31 link. Basically, if
we just points to a repo provided by an ISV like Dropbox it's actually
the ISV which is distributing. If we repackage it we becomes more
responsible for the contents.
> what you mean with "Although we comply with the GL" ?
The whole idea witjh the current GL is that we should not make
packages from "foreign" repos available, with FESCO/Fedora Legal
providing exemptions in some cases. lpf is an exception, but it has
beed reviewed and discussed within the FPC.
> if I have time in future I'll will try do frp idea, as a sub project of lpf
Contributions always welcome! That said, it will probably need a new
discussion with FPC since this is an entirely new way of handling this
Again: this request is more like a test of the legal/policy
ramifications for packaged yum configurations in rpmfusion. Anyone,
Sorry, above all, what means "GL" ?
Sérgio M. B.