On 01/23/2012 11:31 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote: > On 01/23/2012 03:43 AM, Jerry Amundson wrote: >>> Till such time as a package manifest is published, the name and content >>> are a bit academic to discuss</opinion> >> OP stated right off, "practically just to add useful packages," >> So, the base of the "package manifest" is CentOS right from the start. > > its the ones that didnt come from CentOS Base that are most interesting- > how many of them have legal/patent/re-distribution 'issues' or 'baggage > as it were'. Where are these packages going to come from, how are they > going to be maintained and patched, what level of assurances can be put > into place that say that these bits will be maintained for a reasonable > level of time... > > Provided everything in the stack is opensource, re-distributable and > have no baggage in the areas where we have a local presence, it could > very well be a CentOS subproject. Retain name/branding and use the > distribution network etc. > > Also, as Russ already pointed out - we would need to make sure that the > messaging around this are quite clear and dont dilute the distro / > CentOS messaging. Wont be hard to do, just needs a bit of thinking and > organising. > As I previously said, I will prepare something by the end of the week. -- Ljubomir Ljubojevic (Love is in the Air) PL Computers Serbia, Europe Google is the Mother, Google is the Father, and traceroute is your trusty Spiderman... StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant