> Savannah is meant for individual software packages. It seems like > a mistake to try to put a distro there.
I agree here, it might be just as simple to setup a gitweb web interface for git and have all our repos hosted separately this way. > > If we take GPLv3 (and not the v2), it should be compatible with the > > Apache2 License. > > That is true, but still... > > > Are any license in that list[1] used? > > Maybe some EPL? Probably OpenSSL? > > > Paul, could you check? (You have the full source code). > > This would be an additional reason to do it outside Savannah. > But there are enough other reasons. Indeed. Checking each license in Replicant for GPL compatibility seems too big a task to be worth it. It is also a moving target, since new versions will likely introduce new software, with new licenses to review. That seems unreasonable. > Also, it seems like a mistake to add this to the responsibilities of > the Savannah hackers. > > In addition, this isn't part of GNU. > > So let's make this a separate host, replicant.nongnu.org or > replicant.fsf.org. That could work. We could also just as well use the replicant.us namespace, with git.replicant.us. -- Paul Kocialkowski, Replicant developer Replicant is a fully free Android distribution running on several devices, a free software mobile operating system putting the emphasis on freedom and privacy/security. Website: http://www.replicant.us/ Blog: http://blog.replicant.us/ Wiki/tracker/forums: http://redmine.replicant.us/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
