Fedora derivatives branding discussion

Max Spevack mspevack at redhat.com
Thu Apr 20 18:29:33 UTC 2006

On Thu, 20 Apr 2006, Jesse Keating wrote:

> On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 20:19 +0200, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
>> but its still derived from fedora isnt it? distcc is hanging idle in
>> bugzilla for ages :)
>> someone finish the review.
> No, because (as Max forgot to mention) the Based on Fedora must be based
> on the Binary packages, not rebuilds of the source packages.  No
> published Binary, can't use it.

That's a good point.  People have to use the same binaries, signed by 
Fedora/Red Hat if they want to be "official".  We can't trust people to 
not mess them up or do weird stuff if they rebuild from source.

Max Spevack
+ gpg key -- http://people.redhat.com/~mspevack/mspevack.asc
+ fingerprint -- CD52 5E72 369B B00D 9E9A 773E 2FDB CB46 5A17 CF21

More information about the marketing mailing list