From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Phil Edwards To: Jason Molenda Cc: overseers@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: suggested change to sources.redhat.com page Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 06:08:00 -0000 Message-id: <20001101141013.A18757@disaster.jaj.com> References: <3A0055F8.1902A1A5@redhat.com> <20001101103628.A6983@shell17.ba.best.com> X-SW-Source: 2000/msg01210.html 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. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Phil Edwards To: Jason Molenda Cc: overseers@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: suggested change to sources.redhat.com page Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 11:04:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20001101141013.A18757@disaster.jaj.com> References: <3A0055F8.1902A1A5@redhat.com> <20001101103628.A6983@shell17.ba.best.com> X-SW-Source: 2000-q4/msg00080.html Message-ID: <20001101110400.u9-UXiGhYXoMBvVO_wbSrtWC_soQiUWjDImlfZLs26E@z> 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.