Fedora: Open-Source Repository for Long-Term Digital Preservation
Postedabout 1 month agoActive28 days ago
fedorarepository.orgstoryHigh profile
informativepositive
Digital PreservationOpen-Source SoftwareDevelopment_tools
Key topics
Digital Preservation
Open-Source Software
Development_tools
Fedora: Open-source repository for long-term digital preservation
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Very active discussionFirst comment
16m
Peak period
28
0-3h
Avg / period
8
Comment distribution56 data points
Loading chart...
Based on 56 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Dec 12, 2025 at 8:23 AM EST
about 1 month ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Dec 12, 2025 at 8:39 AM EST
16m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
28 comments in 0-3h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Dec 14, 2025 at 9:25 AM EST
28 days ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 46243883Type: storyLast synced: 12/15/2025, 1:05:19 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
https://fedorarepository.org/about/our-history/
Looks like Cornell-UVA satisfied this by placing it on their about page. Red Hat on the other hand hid it on a dedicated legalese page nobody will read: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/
Not a good look IMO.
What does "not a good look" even mean in this context? Getting tired of this phrase's overuse tbh. "Think of the optics" fell into disuse and I can't wait for this one to join it.
Fedora and FEDORA reached an agreement a long time ago. Unless I missed something, neither party has disparaged the other in that time. The parent comment is making drama out of literally nothing. Neither side cares so why is parent OP trying to stir shit up?
As the kids say, "not a good look."
it's a kinder way of saying they're being assholes?
A sibling commenter is right though: the Legal page is linked from the footer, I was looking in the wrong place.
Now, as to why it's on the Fedora Legal Docs site today, that's because a few years ago we undertook a significant migration of all "legal" content from the basically deprecated Fedora Project wiki to the newly created Fedora Legal Docs site. In general, such material is now much easier to find than it was in the wiki era (where it was spread across multiple wiki pages). I don't know when the trademark notice first came to be placed on the Fedora wiki, which itself didn't always exist, but I believe when Cornell-UVA and Red Hat signed the agreement, Fedora may have still been using a redhat.com site.
My point is: Fedora is a great project, but it’s also so much more popular than FEDORA (I assume a lot of HN readers haven’t even heard about this second one before). It would be nice to mention them in just a tiny bit more prominent way – say, at the bottom of about page. But it’s really not a big deal either way.
Directly linked from every page as Legal in the footer. What do you try to say; it almost feels you imply docs.fp.o is obscuring it?
If it's as worded, I'm surprised Fedora Directory Server didn't end up being a problem for RedHat, as its not an OS, and you could call it a digital object repository system, I guess.
Or maybe thats why they re-branded it as 389 Directory Server?
The curious question though is why 389 was formerly called Fedora Directory Server. From what I've been told by someone who was around at the time (as I wasn't), it's because Red Hat went through a very brief period where it experimented with using the "Fedora" brand as a sort of general "upstream of Red Hat, sponsored by Red Hat" sort of community brand. This was I think quickly rejected as a bad idea but Fedora Directory Server was apparently the one (for a while) surviving example of the experiment. I imagine that the reason for the rebranding was that it was confusing to use the "Fedora" name at a certain point because the directory server project never really had anything particularly to do with Fedora (apart from the connection to Red Hat).
For a while there, I thought the "been in existence for 20+ years and our users represent an engaged, supportive and invested global community of users focused on sustainability and growth" was the Fedora Project extending their expertise in file organization and distribution to other use cases.
But on the bright side, I now have a link I can use to confuse my students with (to keep them out of their comfort zone and promote deep research).
https://www.rit.edu/news/rit-class-develops-applications-sup...
And, while not open source, built this: https://dirsig.cis.rit.edu/
Also, I remember some kind of early realtime music accompaniment software, the guy played trumpet and the software played realtime accompaniment.
Also, MIT built X11, which later turned into a bureaucratic exercise instead of software project.
Berkeley, well BSD Unix.
Early web projects came out of Michigan, like gopher.
Not much lately though.
> Upgrades for over 40 dependency libraries, including upgrading Java 11 to Java 21.
Color me skeptical.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46244011
https://ocfl.io/
Maybe some stoner can vibe-rebase this with Rust.