[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: What "Personal Security Manager"?



On Fri, 17 Nov 2000, Joseph Carter wrote:

> The only other thing we must do is send a notification to the government
> that we are doing this - we must do it for ftp.debian.org, but not for
> mirrors necessarily.  Why this is required is anybody's guess.  Several
> other non-US packages have already been included in main despite the fact
> that some of them directly include crypto code.  The fact that we have
> done this coupled with the fact that we decided not to jump through these
> minor hoops - or even seek legal advise on the issue - could put us at
> some risk.

Well, who do we have to brow-beat to get this done?!?

I've tried a couple of times, via -devel to broach this topic, but have
always been ignored ;-{

It is utterly assinine to have sendmail, fetchmail, pine/imap/ipop,
apache, etc. all split into non-ssl and ssl variants.  Furthermore,
a few of the maintainers of the above are in the US and (speaking
for myself) loathe to just plonk ssl variants on non-us.

> If a simple reading of the regulations is insufficient, companies have
> sought legal advice on this matter and determined it legal to distribute
> the stuff with a disclaimer on the site.  Kernel.org determined the same.
> If you ask me (which you didn't I realize), this is worth Debian paying a
> lawyer for advice if it's necessary so we can do away with this split
> archive.

Indeed, but I'm not necessarily advocating dropping of non-us, just
reckless (and useless) package splitting across us/non-us.

-- 
Rick Nelson
In most countries selling harmful things like drugs is punishable.
Then howcome people can sell Microsoft software and go unpunished?
(By hasku@rost.abo.fi, Hasse Skrifvars)



Reply to: