Does anyone have concern about this? What if Redhat stops giving SRPMS for new releases and updates in public? If you buy a subscription to RHEL AS and they have to give you the SRPMS because of GPL agreement can that person provide those SRPMS to public again because of GPL? They claim they are premium OpenSource company but they are still a company and for them money is bottom line. Hopefully this is all legal and we will have SRPMS one way or the other.
_________________________________________________________________ Take charge with a pop-up guard built on patented Microsoft® SmartScreen Technology. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI... Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN® Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*.
As far as i know, as per the GPL, they have to release the srpm's no matter what. You don't need a subscription to rhel to get the srpm's and i don't think you'll be seeing anything like that come into play in the future. When you subscribe to RHEL, you're not exactly paying for the software. Your paying for access to RHN ( ie. bandwidth ), support and your essentially paying for quality assurance. That is, they modify as needed the source, and package it as binary rpm's.
Further to that, I doubt very much redhat would want to put themselves in a possition whereby they wouldn't make the sources available. That wouldn't be very good business practice now would it ? They would just be shunned apon. I know they are well aware of centos, infact if you go to their freenode irc channel, they make mention ( last i saw ) of centos in the topic.
They just need to make a buck is all. They put a lot of work into what they do, not just for redhat's released software but i see many redhat contributions to the kernel itself as well and many other open source projects.
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 13:12:02 -0500, Max Beerli maxbeerli@hotmail.com wrote:
Does anyone have concern about this? What if Redhat stops giving SRPMS for new releases and updates in public? If you buy a subscription to RHEL AS and they have to give you the SRPMS because of GPL agreement can that person provide those SRPMS to public again because of GPL? They claim they are premium OpenSource company but they are still a company and for them money is bottom line. Hopefully this is all legal and we will have SRPMS one way or the other.
Take charge with a pop-up guard built on patented Microsoft® SmartScreen Technology. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI... Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN® Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*.
CentOS mailing list CentOS@caosity.org http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004, Beau Henderson wrote:
As far as i know, as per the GPL, they have to release the srpm's no matter what.
Not quite - they have to make the source available to their customers.
You don't need a subscription to rhel to get the srpm's and i don't think you'll be seeing anything like that come into play in the future.
I agree , and if they did restrict the srpms I dont believe they could or would restrict what customers do with the GPL srpms.
I know they are well aware of centos, infact if you go to their freenode irc channel, they make mention ( last i saw ) of centos in the topic.
I'm not certain that the #freenode irc channel is official redhat ...
Regards Lance
Lance Davis wrote:
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004, Beau Henderson wrote:
As far as i know, as per the GPL, they have to release the srpm's no matter what.
Not quite - they have to make the source available to their customers.
Then the customer can turn around, give it to anyone who wants it and Redhat can't do anything about it. So if this happens, we all just pitch in and buy ONE copy of RHEL for the CentOS team. :)
--Ajay
On Tue, 2004-12-14 at 10:52 -0800, Ajay Sharma wrote:
Lance Davis wrote:
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004, Beau Henderson wrote:
As far as i know, as per the GPL, they have to release the srpm's no matter what.
Not quite - they have to make the source available to their customers.
Then the customer can turn around, give it to anyone who wants it and Redhat can't do anything about it. So if this happens, we all just pitch in and buy ONE copy of RHEL for the CentOS team. :)
We have a license of rhel for this purpose here.
I use it for package comparisons all the time.
-sv
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004, seth vidal wrote:
On Tue, 2004-12-14 at 10:52 -0800, Ajay Sharma wrote:
Lance Davis wrote:
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004, Beau Henderson wrote:
As far as i know, as per the GPL, they have to release the srpm's no matter what.
Not quite - they have to make the source available to their customers.
Then the customer can turn around, give it to anyone who wants it and Redhat can't do anything about it. So if this happens, we all just pitch in and buy ONE copy of RHEL for the CentOS team. :)
We have a license of rhel for this purpose here.
I use it for package comparisons all the time.
as do I here :)
Regards Lance
-
Ajay Sharma -
Beau Henderson -
Lance Davis -
Max Beerli -
seth vidal