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