Hi Alain, Alain Reguera wrote: > Thanks, Karan. Feel your kindness here. I really would like to know > someone who can clear this to me, your lawyer should be able to help surely ? > Our question was, why continue using something that they don't want we > use, even in a rebuild from them?, but even worst when we reached to > love them?. (please, no offence here) I dont understand your question. Who is the 'they' and who is the 'we', and who do you love ? Or, are you asking this list why you should use CentOS even if you dont want to use it ? If that is indeed the question then the answer is simple - dont. Its a free world, you have the liberty to make a choice and use whatever you want. > For that reason, get into my neuronal war and ask you pals. That was > the reason of asking what was exactly the difference between centos > and redhat. Because if CentOS is completely different to redhat, and > though don't have this discriminatory list on it, Cause we believe in > open source, no matter that one bad guy set us apart because you > consider us. open source permit that in a honestly way (I think). > > I am a guy that don't want that my infront sidewalk neighbors use my > software, but only the same sidewalk houses that are around me. So one > modest guy in the houses around rebuild the software I do. They > believe in open source and share to all and release them to the > worldwide (including the infront sidewalk pals too). The infront > sidewalk pals appreciate the modest guy that release a rebuild, even > for their comrades in the same sidewalk around whom haven't the money > to pay the software. If it is possible that, even people who build a > software by any reason don't want to others to use them but release > their sources (by now, or in a future close, the modest guy would have > to buy in order to rebuild and continue with its noble cause ahead) > and permit rebuild of one way or another. > > So, does the open source permit to those that are no permitted by the > main builder to use one software, use the rebuilt software from them, > if a rebuilder (that can do it) release it without cost and without > that discriminatory list? Thinking so because the modest rebuild is > not a work that apply the commercial laws of the sidewalk around of > that, that do. Is that right Karan? Like I said before, you lawyer should have the answers you seek. CentOS is released, as a distro, under the GPL - with packages that have their own individual licenses. > But if there is some type of dependency from redhat that propagates > its rules and politics to the rebuilds, feel like all the battle > swords of my neuronal war passing through my chest :( -- Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : 2522219 at icq