-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 04/24/2014 11:01 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On 24 April 2014 02:49, Christian Schaller <cschalle(a)redhat.com
<mailto:cschalle@redhat.com>> wrote:
Well my point is I spoke to Red Hat legal before I even posted the
original proposal to open up to more 3rd party repositories some
Months ago. There are a lot of repositories that it is perfectly
fine for Fedora to include from a legal perspective. But they will
need to be reviewed by legal on a case to case basis, going to
legal up front and saying 'hey can I include a hypothetical
repository' will only yield you the answer 'depends on the
repository'.
OK cool. What is the plan for when repositories change what they
are carrying and add stuff that may be legal for them but not for
others? Will there be periodic reviews to make sure that this
hasn't happened or some way that we roll back what repositories we
recommend?
At the risk of being glib: What's the plan for periodically
re-reviewing every package in Fedora to make sure that its sources
always remain legal?
It's the same problem and it can only realistically be dealt with by
"If someone notices, deal with it then."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird -
http://www.enigmail.net/
iEYEARECAAYFAlNZNCwACgkQeiVVYja6o6O76gCcC/QdnvusmdalnbqV/X2Bftw/
8L4AoKtkgQGO4EhVGNlfXhgWe6GDgpBd
=Gx5v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----