Fedora Board Recap 07-06-2011

[Richard Fontana]

On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:02:01PM -0400, Jared K. Smith wrote:
> 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).

Ah, I apologize for my misunderstanding. I fully realized the
possibility that my remarks might annoy you of course. :-)

- RF