On Wed, Mar 17, 1999 at 11:40:37AM -0800, Darren Benham wrote: > On Wed, Mar 17, 1999 at 12:15:00PM -0700, Bdale Garbee wrote: > > > > This is unfriendly to the free software community at large, to the > > extent that someone might want to use the DNSsafe code for some non-DNS > > purpose which this license would not cover, forcing them to negotiate a > > different license with RSA. But again, I don't see how this violates > > the DFSG... or how it in any way prevents distribution of BIND. > > That might make BIND free in DFSG sense but relying anything non-free > (which DNSsafe is) would put BIND into contrib in the Debian sense > (non-free if you can't seperate BIND from DNSsafe). >
BIND could remain in main where it is now if the DNSsafe could could be separated without breaking bind. Only if BIND required DNSsafe (obviously non-free) would it end up in contrib. I find it discomforting that a very important part of the Internet is at risk of getting entangled with patent issues and proprietary code when there's perfectly acceptable free code and unpatented (actually patent-expired) technologies that can do the same things. -- Brian Ristuccia [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
