Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: TODO: GNU TLS

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: TODO: GNU TLS
Date: 2006-12-28 22:16:58
Message-ID: 4594425A.8030802@dunslane.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Stephen Frost wrote:
>> My understanding is that most of the 
>> non-FSF lawyers who have looked at this think it's not a problem. I am 
>> not a lawyer, and AFAIK neither are you. Maybe we all need to stop 
>> playing Perry Mason and take some well informed legal advice.
>>     
>
> I'm certainly not a lawyer and I'd be astounded if anyone felt I
> represented myself as such.  I don't have opinions from any lawyers
> beyond Tom's comments previously from RH's legal team and FSF's comments
> on the issue.  I don't know where the 'most of the non-FSF lawyers'
> claim comes from, if you're aware of others who have commented on it I'd
> be happy to listen to them.  

I said that was my understanding, not that I had direct knowledge of it. 
But maybe I'm wrong.

> I do know that this has been an issue for
> Debian for quite some time and it seems rather unlikely that Debian's
> position on it will change.  SPI does have a pro-bono lawyer but I
> don't know that this question has been posed to him, probably because
> the general consensus among the Debian Powers that Be is that it is an
> issue and we try to not bother our pro-bono lawyer too much (being, uh,
> pro-bono and all).
>   

I have a sneaking suspicion that there are some hidden agendas in all this.

I agree with this comment from Steve Langasek at 
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2003/01/msg00022.html :

> Sure, code can be rewritten to use gnutls natively.  But I don't
> understand why anyone would consider this a useful expenditure of
> developer resources when the necessary OpenSSL compat glue could simply
> be made available under the LGPL.
>
>   

If this is such an issue, why hasn't somebody done that?

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Euler Taveira de OliveiraDate: 2006-12-28 22:40:52
Subject: Re: xlog directory at initdb time
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2006-12-28 22:15:25
Subject: Re: Recent SIGSEGV failures in buildfarm HEAD

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group