On 19/01/15 01:22, W. Martin Borgert wrote: > On 2015-01-18 12:23, W. Martin Borgert wrote: >> On 2015-01-18 12:16, W. Martin Borgert wrote: >>> Upstream has been contacted. So far they seem to think, that >>> this is a Debian internal issue and don't want to add anything >>> to their license (GPL-3+). I'll try again. >> >> Isn't the fact that upstream does not care sufficient evidence >> that in this case upstream is not opposed to linking against >> OpenSSL? This fact must be documented in debian/copyright and >> should be equally valid as the formal exception, right? > > OK, not quite: Upstream explicitly states, that OpenSSL license > is incompatible with GPL-3, but is seen by them as system library > if it does provide functions via the Python standard library. > > https://github.com/xray7224/PyPump/issues/101#issuecomment-70409244 > https://github.com/xray7224/PyPump/issues/101#issuecomment-70409569 > > Discussion is closed there, so I will upload pypump to Debian on > the ground that upstream (= copyright holder!) does not object. > OK?
OK. It can't hurt to try - this does seem like a special case. I hope that pypump gets accepted! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54bc0941.2070...@bitmessage.ch
