On 12/23/05, Thomas Vander Stichele <thomas(a)apestaart.org> wrote:
Also, when was the last time that in a traditional closed software
offer
you could see the source, make changes to it, submit the changes, and
get legal use out of your changes by using the next version of the
binary that gets released ?
As i've mentioned elsewhere... the inability to patch as needed
downstream without upstream authorization is probably a deal breaker
without invoking the rights of downstream rebuilders who want to use
Fedora sources. A Fedora maintainer would need to have the
flexibility and authority to patch for security/compatibility on a
timescale faster than upstream might be able to respond. A
requirement for any patches to be submitted back to upstream isn't
unreasonable to me. But having to wait for upstream to formally bless
them and re-incorporate them is going to be a maintenance burden.
This I believe is one of problems which keeps pine out of Fedora.
-jef