On Sat, Apr 27, 2002 at 03:49:29PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > On Sat, Apr 27, 2002 at 02:35:42PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: > > I.e., probably 85% of the crypto we have in woody uses code that's > > covered by the old-style BSD license. Not only is the old BSD license > > GPL-incompatible, the advertising clause also affects us if we do any > > advertising regarding that references OpenSSL. > Does this qualify as advertising, though? (I honestly don't know) > www.openssh.org, for instance, does not have a notice of this kind that I > can see, but I wouldn't consider it advertising either. If in doubt, I suggest referring the question to debian-legal or to SPI's own lawyers. I'm just passing it on, as I didn't consider it until it was pointed out to me and I figure being aware of this as a possible issue would be a good thing given how significant of a feature crypto-in-main is for Debian 3.0. Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpbTMjt1Jszb.pgp
Description: PGP signature