Non-free Extras?

[Eric Mesa]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



sean wrote:

> On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 18:27:09 -0500 Eric Mesa
> <ericsbinaryworld at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> In order to pull in packagers like those maintaining Dries, Dag
>> Weirs, freshrpms, and others, and in order to assure Fedora users
>> that their packages would work instead of saying, "if you don't
>> use official packages, you're on your own," has there been any
>> conversation on taking an example from Debian and having a
>> non-free repository? It would also free up the packagers who
>> spend so much time duplicating each other's packages in order to
>> ensure compatibility. I know there are issues with their ffmpeg
>> and mp3 codecs, but could these issues be solved simply by
>> designating their repositories as non-free? I think it would
>> greatly enhance the Fedora experience, IMHO as a loyal FC user
>> since Yarrow.
>>
>
> Not speaking as an authority, but such notions are directly against
> the stated goals of this project. The fact that there are some
> people who want to also use non-free software doesn't (and
> shouldn't) change the nature or goals of the project itself. Those
> who want to do so should create a central repository themselves and
> provide whatever guarantees they can muster. It's not likely to
> ever be able to use Fedora branding though.
>
> Sean
>
I figured.  I thought it was worth asking, just in case.

- --
Eric Mesa
ericsbinaryworld at gmail.com
http://www.ericsbinaryworld.com
Note:  All emails from this address should have a GPG signature.  If
you have the proper setup you can use this to confirm my identity and
that the email was not changed in transit.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFD+60CPvU+8ApmWXIRAq//AJ91nwuJJX5pbKg7IcKdlhNcq9MzxACfY7N5
xLFvCzeiQ/+hHi1RDcVufNs=
=4Tax
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----