[CentOS] A minor beef

Bryan J. Smith thebs413 at earthlink.net
Tue Nov 29 09:09:19 UTC 2005

ryan wrote:
> What is illegal in Redmond, USA is not necessarily illegal in the rest of
> the world and vice versa.

Lamar Owen wrote:
> What is relevant is what is legal for CentOS, not for anyone else.  In this 
> case, that would mean the project leads' countries' laws would be in force; 
> the centos.org domain registration is in Great Britain, so British law would 
> apply and would define what is or is not legal.

Listen guys, because this is the _last_time_ I'm going to say it.

The _context_ of this _entire_ thread is about what CentOS can and
cannot redistribute, which leads to the reason why you have to use DAG
or any other repository, which leads to added issues with updates aka
"repository hell", etc...  9 times out of 10, when I have an update
issue, it is a conflict between 2 or more repositories I did _not_ know
about (and it is not quickly 

You might want to debate back'n forth, point fingers at Redmond, try to
rationalize what is legal/illegal in whatever locale's, etc...  But what
I've seen CentOS do, and it's the _same_ for Fedora, Debian, etc..., is
create a 100% redistributable distro.  That way other projects can
redistribute it unmodified, I can redistribute it unmodified, etc...
that means _leaving_out_ software that must be explicitly licensed for
redistribution -- Java, various multimedia, etc...

If you don't like it, _get_over_it_!  I honestly think this list is
quickly becoming the "bitch about it, even if it won't change for good
reason" list -- instead of providing solutions.

I am personally and, more importantly, professionally _thankful_ that
CentOS is like this, because it makes it easier for me to avoid
indemnification issues.  Yes, that nasty word SCO misused and abused
(wrongly) _is_ a reality when it comes to redistribution of software you
do _not_ have a legal license too.  Some distros care, because they care
about _your_ legality beyond what they may or may have no licensed.
Many do _not_.

Now that's the _context_ of why CentOS leads to using other
repositories, and the resulting "repository hell" whether you realize
that is the "root cause" of update issues or not.  Everything else is
arguments about what will _not_ change in CentOS -- let alone Fedora
Core/Extras, official Debian repositories, etc... as well.  So there is
no reason or use to debate it, it will _not_ change.

Bryan J. Smith   mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org
Some things (or athletes) money can't buy.
For everything else there's "ManningCard."

More information about the CentOS mailing list