On Tue, Aug 06, 2002 at 11:32:35PM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote: > psi uses a library, libqssl1 which is lgpl. However, since it links
Psi does work perfectly well without libqssl1 installed. So I wouldn't say it's linked with libqssl1. Look at it this way: Psi, without qssl, surely is not a problem. Yes, it contains some provision to add a feature that can not be used, but well, there are loads of unimplemented features in several GPL programs. Then, we would violate GPL if we distributed a 'derivative work' of psi and a non-GPL program. But without modifying psi, how could we create a derivative work, just by adding a second package which could possibly combined with psi by the user? IMHO, this is as much a copyright violation as distributing bash and some shell scripts which are not GPL. I'll reassign this bug to libqssl1, because if we come to the conclusion that there is a copyright violation, I'll remove libqssl1 and not psi, until there is a solution. (Either a GNUTLS version of qssl, or a changed license) Jan
