Fedora Board Recap 07-06-2011

[Jared K. Smith]

On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 3:58 PM, Richard Fontana <rfontana at redhat.com> wrote:
> Whoa. I object, if the Board is suggesting that the Asterisk agreement
> bears any similarity to the FPCA.

I didn't mean to imply in the meeting that the FPCA was an analog to
the Asterisk agreement, but I see that the meeting minutes look that
way.  I'm sorry for the confusion there.

I brought up the license agreement in Asterisk as an example of a
community (one that I'm very familiar with) that took a long hard look
at explicit licensing vs. implicity licensing.  I didn't mean to imply
that the the Asterisk license agreement itself is close to the FPCA.
I even said in the meeting something to the effect of "Coming from the
Asterisk community, and reading the first few drafts of the FPCA was
like a breath of fresh air."

I'll be the first to admit that although I understand Digium's
reasoning behind their license agreement, it is not my favorite.  The
FPCA, on the other hand, is not only simpler to understand, but much
more fair (in my opinion).

--
Jared Smith
Fedora Project Leader