On Tue, 23 Dec 2008, Karanbir Singh wrote: > Ned Slider wrote: >> I agree with Dag that solution providers shouldn't be able to sell it as >> CentOS if it clearly isn't because they've modified, disabled or removed >> key parts of the system. > > ok, so lets be clear about one thing - no-one except CentOS.org can > distribute anything called 'CentOS'. Everything else is just 'derived > from, based on, using parts of, inspired from etc. So can they distribute centos-release verbatim ? Because that is the problem to me. They may state somewhere that it is based on, but the users sees /etc/redhat-release and that clearly says CentOS. The user thinks he is getting CentOS and we are expecting different things when giving support. Yum problems clearly are the big offender here, but I can imagine other things as well. I'd prefer to clearly state that centos-release cannot be distributed if it does not comply with some rules. (We can of course also forbid distributing some other things that hold CentOS in that case) -- -- dag wieers, dag at centos.org, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]