Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@×××××××××××××.uk>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: Gentoo's Social Contract & Bugzilla (was: "Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for August")
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 23:40:45
Message-Id: 20060805003750.3fd02bb7@snowdrop.home
In Reply to: Gentoo's Social Contract & Bugzilla (was: "Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for August") by Peter Gordon
1 On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 16:30:03 -0700 Peter Gordon
2 <codergeek42@g.o> wrote:
3 | Maybe it's just me, but I think that having such a core component of
4 | the distribution be proprietary is in complete violation of Gentoo's
5 | Social Contract[1] (if not the letter of it, then its spirit of
6 | openness). It states:
7 |
8 | "Gentoo will never never depend upon a piece of software or
9 | metadata unless it conforms to the GNU General Public License,
10 | the GNU Lesser General Public License, the Creative Commons -
11 | Attribution/Share Alike or some other license approved by the
12 | Open Source Initiative (OSI)."
13 |
14 | Isn't this one of the driving reasons why our forums run phpBB instead
15 | of something like vBulletin, for example? :)
16
17 In the past, it's been more or less agreed that it's not depending
18 upon it if it uses an open data format... There was talk of moving the
19 forums to proprietary software at one point, for example.
20
21 --
22 Ciaran McCreesh
23 Mail : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk
24
25
26 --
27 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo's Social Contract & Bugzilla Peter Gordon <codergeek42@g.o>