Actualy, you are wrong.
If it is correct that beehive should be released, then a list, such as
this, can be used to obtain an agreed concenus that it should be taken
further.
Shooting first ask later is not clever and this is excatly why I asked
here. I knew I would see the "its no use to you, so why ask", "its
old" and good old Warren with his "stop asking" blindside manner, but
the crux of of this issue is that its not up to YOU (anyone aside from
me) as to its (beehives) usefullness. People are asked to lobby
against voilations all the time, even when it doesn't affect them. Its
the princible, so, if people do agree that it is a something worth
taking to the RH legal team, then I will do so. I think Mr Harrold
shows a "real" world example as to the fact that beehive does indeed
play a large role in the control of building GPL sources at RH.
I have a better idea and one that results in much less discussion about
this subject.
if you'd like to see a buildsystem that can build anaconda then
contribute to the one we're(mostly dcbw) working on for fedora extras.
If it works well then we can lobby to work on using it to build fedora
core, too.
then presto, no more beehive to worry with. :)
-sv