Re: [PROPOSAL] Allowing crypto in the main archive

[Jakob Bøhm <jbj@image.dk>]

Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> 
> >>"Jakob" == Jakob Bøhm <jbj@image.dk> writes:
>  Jakob> What I was proposing was, that package maintainers would
>  Jakob> (by some future policy change not directly related to non-us)
> 
>         Frankly, I would be opposed to such a policy mod. I am not
>  convinced that such granularity does not open me up for liability I
>  can't afford, aqnd I certainly shall not follow such an edict on my
>  non fre package.
> 

My proposal on formalized licensing keywords dropped (this time
round),
as I said originally, this is off-topic anyway.

> 
>         If you feel strongly about it, feel free ot offer such
>  granularity on the web (and put money where your mouth it, and assume
>  all the liability). If you think there is no liability, there should
>  be no problem; right?
> 

This would be silly and pointless, a list which is not part of
the package itself would not be trustworthy and could too easily
get out of sync.  Anyway, if an unsynced listing is all one wants,
the Linux Software Map (.lsm files) provides this, which is why
I thought it would have been easy to implement in the dpkg header
too.

IANAL

Jakob

-- 
This message is hastily written, please ignore any unpleasant
wordings,
do not consider it a binding commitment, even if its phrasing may
indicate so. Its contents may be deliberately or accidentally untrue.
Trademarks and other things belong to their owners, if any.