I fail to see how Canonical asking you to recompile packages with
their Ubuntu branding elements removed differs in the slightest
from Red Hat asking you do to the same thign with RHEL packages.
Except that to get any RHEL packages to begin with, you first have
to sign and agreement to pay Red Hat a monthly service fee.
Scott Sweeny, Stephen Michael Kellat likes this.
Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠), Stephen Michael Kellat shared this.
Fair question. The way I read the Conservancy statement, it's in the details.
Certainly a fair question. The difference is that Red Hat always demanded that branding be stripped, and they didn't offer binaries to non-subscribers. You got source.
And projects like CentOS and Scientific Linux took that source and did the hard work of removing branding and building binary distributions on their own infrastructure.
Canonical, on the other hand, supplies binaries to all comers. And many a downstream project has used those binaries as a base.
Just like Ubuntu does with Debian.
I wonder if it's any different with Fedora. Is there a similar requirement for using Fedora packages in a downstream distribution?
And projects like CentOS and Scientific Linux took that source and did the hard work of removing branding and building binary distributions on their own infrastructure.
Canonical, on the other hand, supplies binaries to all comers. And many a downstream project has used those binaries as a base.
Just like Ubuntu does with Debian.
I wonder if it's any different with Fedora. Is there a similar requirement for using Fedora packages in a downstream distribution?