| 1 |
On 22/05/06, Thomas Cort <tcort@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Since Gentoo will never depend upon a |
| 3 |
> piece of non-Free software[1], it is safe to assume that the package |
| 4 |
> manager is Free software (aka open source). Because of this, we will |
| 5 |
> never be locked-in, helpless, or under the control of an external |
| 6 |
> project. If we dislike the direction in which it is going or want to |
| 7 |
> add our own features, then we are free to do so either by submitting |
| 8 |
> patches upstream, adding our own custom gentoo patches to the stock |
| 9 |
> sources, or by forking the project entirely. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Exactly. It's the license that matters. By the definition some people |
| 12 |
have used, Gentoo has no "full control" over the kernel, gcc, glibc, |
| 13 |
or python, and yet still depends on them. While it might hurt some |
| 14 |
people's pride to have a non-Gentoo controlled package manager, it |
| 15 |
really is no different to Ubuntu using apt. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
-- |
| 18 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives