Re: [gnutls-dev]GNU TLS OpenSSL compatibility layer under GPL, not LGPL
On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 02:43, Nikos Mavroyanopoulos wrote:
> Yes, the OpenSSL compatibility layer was written by Andrew McDonald
> to allow GPL programs, that depended on openssl, to compile out of the box
> with gnutls. This was the major problem back then.
CUPS is admittedly unique in this respect; the libraries are LGPL, but
the server and support programs are GPL (with optional OpenSSL
exception). So, we have to be extra careful about the licensing; the
licensing has to be GPL-compatible as well as not jeapordize the LGPL's
> > - Would the authors consider changing the license on the OpenSSL layer
> > to the LGPL? I am not concerned so much with the rest of gnutls-extra,
> > or how the code ends up being organized.
> This is up to Andrew to decide, but I don't think that this is
> really needed. Programs that can use the compatibility layer (which
> is quite limited), can be easily modified to use the native gnutls API,
> and this is the recommended way. Isn't the upstream author interested
> into using gnutls?
Yes, he is. But he hasn't had the time to add the support, and from his
perspective the current OpenSSL support is sufficient.
If it comes down to it, I will probably write native GNU TLS support
into CUPS myself. I probably would have done it anyway, as it's
arguably the best way to do it, but I was hoping to get SSL-enabled CUPS
into the hands of Debian users sooner. So I thought I'd ask, just in
case you didn't object.
If you or Andrew would please let me know what decision is reached, I
would greatly appreciate it. Thanks for your work.
Jeff Licquia <email@example.com>