On Mon, 11 Jun 2012, Yasha Karant wrote:

> 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
>

It was said to be complete.

-Connie Sieh