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

GPL-3 & openssl: provide a -nossl variant for a library


I'm the maintainer for src:librabbitmq and the binary package
librabbitmq1 is linked against libssl1.0.0 (OpenSSL).

Now I was approached by Julien Kerihuel from the OpenChange project, who
release their software under the terms of GPL-3, asking if I could
provide an alternative to the OpenSSL-linked library so they can use it
without causing a license conflict.

Sadly librabbitmq only supports OpenSSL, there is rudimentary support
for GnuTLS but it seems to be severely broken at the moment.

Considering this, is it a good idea to provide a librabbitmq1-nossl
binary package that was built without OpenSSL while still having
librabbitmq1 with OpenSSL-support?

I could not find another package that does this, so I assume that a
similar situation did not yet occur (unlikely) or that there where
arguments against providing such a package variant.

Michael Fladischer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: