On 14 March 2014 17:32, Manuel Wolfshant <wolfy at nobugconsulting.ro> wrote: > > > On 15 martie 2014 00:44:29 EET, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge at gmail.com> > wrote: > > >> How would this apply to something like EPEL, which in el6 has XFCE > >> packaged. Would it be acceptable to pull that in, or would that > >simply > >> count as 1 of the 3? > >> > >> > >That was something that I figured would also need to be planned for. > >Where > >do these packages live? Who is caring for them? My initial viewpoint is > >that it would be nice if the people on a desktop were co-maintainers on > >the > >package set if it were in EPEL. > > Beware that - leaving sponsorship aside - becoming an EPEL maintainer > implies accepting the Fedora EULA. I know of people who refused to /could > not become Fedora contributors because they could/would not accept that > license. > > I don't know of a Fedora EULA (which would be an End User License Agreement). There is a Fedora Contributor Agreement which replaced a different one (Fedora ICLA) which did have the stigma you listed above . https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Fedora_Project_Contributor_Agreement Most of these rules seem to be common sense ones.. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20140314/bf6f5206/attachment-0005.html>