Re: suggested change to sources.redhat.com page

[Phil Edwards <pedwards@disaster.jaj.com>]

On Wed, Nov 01, 2000 at 10:36:29AM -0800, Jason Molenda wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 01, 2000 at 09:42:16AM -0800, Mark Sobell wrote:
> 
> > I ran across the following paragraph and thought
> > it inappropriate for the Red Hat site.  

sources.redhat.com isn't "the Red Hat site".

www.redhat.com is.  That can be (and is) covered by disclaimers and
copyrights and everything else that tends to annoy the very people working
on sources.redhat projects.


> My two cents:  Of course it's inappropriate, that's why I wrote
> it.  Y'all can decide if you want to change it (I'm not going to
> mind one way or the other), but it isn't accidental - I really hate
> corporate cover-your-ass written-in-legalese privacy statements,
> when it all comes down to "We're keeping standard apache log files,
> we don't give it to anyone else".

Hear, hear.  I personally know three people who have read the
sources.redhat page and become interested in the projects specifically
because it was lighthearted, and therefore obviously /not/ an "official"
RH company-related site.  They're interested in libre software, but not
interested in corporate-managed collaboration, and that's the impression
that an officious-sounding legalese disclaimer on the sources.redhat page
would make.


Phil

-- 
pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com  |  pme at sources dot redhat dot com
devphil at several other less interesting addresses in various dot domains
The gods do not protect fools.  Fools are protected by more capable fools.