During one of my last reviews I've stumbled again over some "Code versus
Content" issues. After reviewing
carefully I've come to the following understanding:
Legal status of the content
If Fedora somehow publishes the files in any form (source or binary RPM)
then they must be under an acceptable license and redistribution must be
legally permitted. Additionally it must met the Fedora's criteria
described in the packaging guidelines (content should not be offensive,
no mp3 files, ...).
If the legal as well as Fedora's criteria are not met, the files must
not be shipped in any way and so they must be even stripped off from the
Question 1: How much investigation is needed from the packager or
reviewer? Is asking upstream for an official statement sufficient?
Content or example
If the files can be considered as examples they can just be included in
the packages without any interaction with FeSCO.
The explicit criteria is not defined, but the following seems quite
logical to me:
If the files contain rather small demonstrations of the package's
capabilities then they are examples (e.g. some midi files in an audio
If the files contain a rather detailed or complete work (e.g. if the
midi file would contain a thoroughly arranged concert), then they are
Question 2: If it is undecided, who should make the final decision
whether something is just an example?
Inclusion of content
If the files are considered as "real" content and are legally
permissable then FeSCO has the final word about the inclusion.
Does this summary reflects the intention behind the packaging guidelines