Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> wouldn't be able to distribute it at all. (I'll add "I'm pretty sure" to
> that last statement, as I certainly don't speak in any official way for
> the Debian project
Who does, really :>
> Your certainly welcome (even encouraged) to bring the topic up on
> the debian-legal mailling list for comments and discussion. It would
> certainly be a shame to re-implement something when it can be easily
> avoided.
Agreed. Basically, the point was that we take the FSF, the GPL, and
free-software very seriously here, so we're not going to skimp on the
details, and I'm glad you brought this up. I hadn't realized there
was a licensing issue with OpenSSH, so that'll be good to keep in
mind.
When we get closer to having to make a decision, we'll have to see
where we are. If RMS and the FSF really are OK with an exception,
then we'll probably at least talk about it if OpenSSH is the "best
thing" , but we also have other alternatives.
If we end up having a proxy on the server side, which we may need for
other reasons, then (I think, without thinking too much about it) we
can use whatever encryption/authentication we want -- possibly even
just GPG encrypted chunks :>
--
Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP=E80E0D04F521A094 532B97F5D64E3930
_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gnumatic.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
