Re: Intel IA-32 EL License - ok for non-free?
On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 06:07:44PM -0400, Roberto C. S?nchez wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 03:42:10PM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> > * Section 4: "Updates" requires "commerically reasonable efforts" to
> > supply our "customers" with updates that Intel distributes. If this
> > means we cannot say no to an update from Intel, that does not sound
> > reasonable for non-free. But perhaps we are exempt from this since
> > 1) non-free isn't officially part of Debian and 2) we are a
> > non-commercial entity making commercially feasibility null?
> There is also the issue that Intel's update policy may not mesh well
> with the stable release update policy.
Exactly, and according to their definition of "Intel Updates" it does not.
> What about a "downloader" that lives in contrib and just polls the Intel
> site (or whatever, it can be cron-based or only happen when the admin
> executes it) and downloads the whole thing, including any updates?
Possibly - but I'd prefer to persuade Intel to fix up their licensing
first and workaround it as a last resort. I plan to contact them with
any issues we uncover in this thread.