RE: DNS servers
Pardon my ignorance, but why is tinydns/qmail/etc under a restrictive
license? I've been very interested in running tinydns (I run bind now
because there are debian packages) but I run the debianized(src package)
qmail because I think it's the best server out there for my purpose. I
really don't like bind's configuration, and lack of security, so I've
been looking at switching to tinydns for some time, however having to
compile by source on debian has given me problems before, so I was
hoping for a debianized package, even if it's another src package.
Is it just so that no trojans can be popped into the source as we've
been seeing much of recently, and DJB getting falsely blamed? Or is it
another reason?
--
Matt Andreko
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff S Wheeler [mailto:jsw@five-elements.com]
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 10:47 AM
To: D. J. Bernstein
Cc: debian-isp@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: DNS servers
The draconian license you use to distribute tinydns and other software
is problematic for me. I can accept different zone file syntax with
ease, and can even adapt myself to the notion that the filesytem is used
as a configuration database. I can also understand that your resistance
to a license that would allow binary distribution, or distribution of
patched sources, is well-intentioned, but I cannot agree with it.
--
Jeff S Wheeler <jsw@five-elements.com>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: