On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 06:38:19AM -0500, William Pitcock wrote:
> So, in a nutshell, nobody in the current IRCd development community
> cares about perceived GPL+OpenSSL compatibility issues, so only Debian
> does, which is "ok", but that's not so useful when Debian is already
> shipping packages linked against OpenSSL with no exception (see below).
[...]
> So, in the grand scheme of things, I don't really think one more package
> linked against OpenSSL is going to hurt anything.
There are lots of packages which have licensing issues, but we try to
resolve those issues. Adding a new one with known issues is not helping,
it is hurting our efforts to produce a distribution that is free from
licensing issues.
I think if you discuss the issue with the other main developers and you
agree to add the exemption to the upstream tarball, then it is OK for
Debian to distribute charybdis. I don't think dead authors or people who
contributed small patches will object, after all the intention was all
along that one could freely distribute charybdis linked to OpenSSL.
--
Met vriendelijke groet / with kind regards,
Guus Sliepen <guus@debian.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature