Re: Third-party repositories and Fedora

2022-05-03 Thread Matthew Miller
On Mon, May 02, 2022 at 10:51:10PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On a related note: > I've had a package stuck in package review, because the reviewer > (rightfully) wanted clarification whether we could ship some files. > We blocked the FE-Legal bug in bugzilla on the review bug over a month > a

Re: Third-party repositories and Fedora

2022-05-02 Thread Fabio Valentini
On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 7:52 PM Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 04:00:28PM +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > > Legal ML ignored this question, so I'll post it here. > > Please be patient. Messages involving legal sometimes take more than a few > days to respond to. On a r

Re: Third-party repositories and Fedora

2022-04-27 Thread Matthew Miller
On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 04:00:28PM +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > Legal ML ignored this question, so I'll post it here. Please be patient. Messages involving legal sometimes take more than a few days to respond to. -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader _

Third-party repositories and Fedora

2022-04-27 Thread Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
Hello. Legal ML ignored this question, so I'll post it here. Why we can[1] add unfiltered Flathub (it contains both patent-encumbered and proprietary software) and we can't[2] add RPM Fusion at the same time? Btw, some of most popular OSS applications on Flathub even doesn't built from sourc