On 06/11/2012 08:39 AM, Connie Sieh wrote:
> Policy on Scientific Linux(SL) Life Cycle
>
>      We plan on following the TUV Life Cycle.  Currently that is a total of
>      10 years. See http://www.scientificlinux.org/distributions/
>      We expect to continue releasing Scientific Linux(SL) just
>      as we have in the past. *
>
> * Provided TUV continues to make the source rpms publicly available
>
> -Connie Sieh
> -Pat Riehecky

Am I missing something here?  I thought under the GPL as well as various 
other open source licenses, TUV was required to make available the full 
source from which the full non-encumbered distro could be built 
(non-encumbered means excluding any proprietary drivers, etc., that 
"taint the kernel").  TUV can split things up in such a way as to make 
it very difficult to build the system from source, but not impossible 
(no components eliminated, no documentation eliminated , e.g., source 
without "readme" files).   The only thing that must be eliminated are 
the TUV logos and trademarks, but the internal TUV authorship credit on 
all of source files must be retained.

If I am missing something, is there a discussion link (URL) of the 
issues, preferably not in legalese?

Yasha Karant