On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 5:49 PM, Kevin Kofler
wrote:
> Hunting for patents is one thing (I wouldn't recommend it either), but
> looking for obviously patent-encumbered stuff (like MP3 codecs) is another
> .
Unfortunately it is generally not obvious what things are "obviously
patent-encumbered".
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 7:49 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Eric Smith wrote:
>> IANAL, but multiple lawyers have told me that it is generally a bad idea
>> to go looking for patents, at least in the US. If they're brought to your
>> attention, you should probably do whatever is necessary to avoid them
Eric Smith wrote:
> IANAL, but multiple lawyers have told me that it is generally a bad idea
> to go looking for patents, at least in the US. If they're brought to your
> attention, you should probably do whatever is necessary to avoid them, but
> you shouldn't actively seek them out, even just to
drago01 wrote:
> We have been shipping patented code in freetype for a while (until it
> expired) we just disabled it at build time.
But this has never been compliant with Fedora Legal policies.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproje
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Isaac Cortés González <
w.isaac.cor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So, should I just clone the git repositories and build from those raw
> sources?
>
Sounds reasonable to me.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/list
El jun 8, 2014 10:53 PM, "Eric Smith" escribió:
> IANAL, but multiple lawyers >have told me that it is generally >a bad
idea to go looking for >patents, at least in the US. If >they're brought
to your >attention, you should probably >do whatever is necessary to >avoid
them, but you shouldn't
> se
On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 8:36 PM, Isaac Cortés González <
w.isaac.cor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I can look for any "patented" or closed source software
>
IANAL, but multiple lawyers have told me that it is generally a bad idea to
go looking for patents, at least in the US. If they're brought to your
So it's more a reason of manpower than any other thing. The question would
be: is there any to accomplish this task?
I can look for any "patented" or closed source software and if any of them
are critical to build the SDK and NDK. Also I'll ask to the Replicant
project for any hint/tip on this.
El
drago01 wrote:
> So I simply do not know whether the "remove patented code from he
> tarball" is simply paranoia or there is really a legal reason for it.
I've been asked by fedora-legal to remove stuff from tarballs on multiple
occasions for this reason.
-- Rex
--
devel mailing list
devel@li
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 4:00 AM, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
>
>> The ripping things out of tarballs policy seems really weird to me.
>> It means, for example, that I can't compare the hash of the openssl
>> tarball to upstream's.
>>
>> Is it really necessary? I understand that Fe
Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> The ripping things out of tarballs policy seems really weird to me.
> It means, for example, that I can't compare the hash of the openssl
> tarball to upstream's.
>
> Is it really necessary? I understand that Fedora can't ship anything
> infringes on a patent, but I ha
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Isaac Cortés González wrote:
>> But it is licensed under an Apache license, we can download the source and
>> build it ourselves.
>
> Yes, please contact the Replicant folks for how to rebuild the Android SDK
> from source. (Last I checked, the
Isaac Cortés González wrote:
> But it is licensed under an Apache license, we can download the source and
> build it ourselves.
Yes, please contact the Replicant folks for how to rebuild the Android SDK
from source. (Last I checked, they didn't document the procedure either, but
they should know
But it is licensed under an Apache license, we can download the source and
build it ourselves.
-Isaac C.
2014-06-02 12:14 GMT-06:00 Andrew Lutomirski :
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 12:44 AM, Christopher Meng
> wrote:
> > After looking at the link you provided, it's easy to see that we mus
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 12:44 AM, Christopher Meng wrote:
> After looking at the link you provided, it's easy to see that we must
> have Android SDK packaged which is non-free IMO.
It's plausible that Qt5 could be buildable against Replicant, though.
--Andy
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fed
After looking at the link you provided, it's easy to see that we must
have Android SDK packaged which is non-free IMO.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
I don't really know. I've been looking and in the download page, and
there's a package, named qtandroidextras-opensource-src-5.x.x.tar.XXX; but
there's that much explanation if it is the core for develop in android, or
addons to the core (the "extras" part in the name confuses me); then I
found thi
Isaac Cortés González wrote:
> This may be a repeated topic. But is there any effort to add to the repos
> the packages of Qt to develop for Android? If there isn't how can I help?
What "packages of Qt" does this include?
-- Rex
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin
This may be a repeated topic. But is there any effort to add to the repos
the packages of Qt to develop for Android? If there isn't how can I help?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraprojec
19 matches
Mail list logo
