| 1 |
On 2011.08.20 23:20, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Roy Bamford |
| 3 |
> <neddyseagoon@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> > As far as I am aware, under the current organisation there is no |
| 5 |
> legal |
| 6 |
> > connection between the Gentoo Foundation Inc., and the Gentoo |
| 7 |
> > distribution. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
[snip] |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Regardless of who can get sued, we should comply with the GPL |
| 12 |
> regardless. To that end I agree that we should refrain from shipping |
| 13 |
> historical binaries unless we also tarball portage and the distfiles |
| 14 |
> from the same period of time. I definitely agree with his suggestion |
| 15 |
> that we should always make both available online simultaneously to |
| 16 |
> avoid the 3-year rule. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
[snip] |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Rich |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Rich, |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
There are two separate issue here and they have separate timescales for |
| 27 |
being addressed. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
We need to comply with the GPL now and always, so we should do as |
| 30 |
Duncan suggests. Take down old binaries now and post sources with new |
| 31 |
binaries. e.g. the liveDVDs. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Sorting out our internal structure is a separate issue to address in |
| 34 |
slower time but it needs to be done before something goes wrong because |
| 35 |
there just won't be time then. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
Regards, |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Roy Bamford |
| 41 |
(Neddyseagoon) a member of |
| 42 |
elections |
| 43 |
gentoo-ops |
| 44 |
forum-mods |
| 45 |
trustees |
Archives