Yes, we'll sort it out in the next few days, Andreas. Two points:
* What Amul has created is not complete. He removed one place where
"openssl" is in the name of a symbolic link, but did not remove
another place where the reference implementation of the plugin calls
OpenSSL.
* I'm hoping that we'll sort out Thorsten's concern pretty quickly.
Normally, there is a concern when software with a permissive license
calls another software with a strong copyleft. But in this case, we
have software with a strong copyleft (GT.M) calling software with a
permissive license (OpenSSL).
Regards
-- Bhaskar
On 10/05/2014 03:53 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi Bhaskar,
>
> I'm fine with waiting some days. However, I really recommend to sort
> out these things as fast as possible. If we want to have a chance for
> V6.2-000 in the next Debian stable release there are only a few days
> left (maximum ten days). These discussions tend to take long and may be
> the pragmatic solution Amul has found might be a compromise for the
> moment.
>
> Kind regards
>
> Andreas.
>
> On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 09:26:10AM -0400, Bhaskar, K.S wrote:
>> Andreas, please hold off on the upload till the discussion between
>> Thorsten and me runs its course. Thank you.
>>
>> My preference is to keep the package with "openssl" in the names of the
>> symbolic links, since V6.2-000 just continues what V6.1-000 did in the
>> reference implementation of the plugin being able to request
>> cryptographic computations from OpenSSL for services (as did V6.0-003
>> before V6.1-000), and no one previously raised any questions about it.
>> Otherwise, we will address it with a note in the README.
>>
>> Regards
>> -- Bhaskar
>>
>> On 10/04/2014 07:24 PM, Amul Shah wrote:
>>> Hi Andreas,
>>>>> [amul:4] V6.2-000 is ready for upload!
>>>> And so I did. Thanks for your work on this
>>> [amul:7] While we wait for the apparent licensing conflict to resolve (I
>>> don't understand how dynamically linking a library causes problems, but I'm
>>> no lawyer ;), I went ahead and updated the CMakelists.txt patch to not
>>> build the encryption plugins that leverage OpenSSL. I also eliminated the
>>> final lintian warnings. I'll ensure those changes reach upstream.
>>>
>>> [amul:7] We are once again ready for upload!
>>>
>>> thanks, Amul
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> GT.M - Rock solid. Lightning fast. Secure. No compromises.
>>
>> _____________
>> The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or
>> confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the
>> message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message
>> in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please
>> be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving
>> and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you.
>>
>>
>> --
>> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
>> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
>> Archive:
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=https://lists.debian.org/543146F2.10809%40fisglobal.com&k=%2FbkpAUdJWZuiTILCq%2FFnQg%3D%3D%0A&r=G5N3MCzgmIzHOZjVHAPkWPrIpVi%2BYUaznSzJrMCLquI%3D%0A&m=lCoJz6yo1bcTlBQAk0jixRyGZNNVJTusUt2yuVxVXoY%3D%0A&s=409f0ab2fd574353492e9a82e40a681b5c2ac36e57a2589431a867215b250933
>>
>>
--
GT.M - Rock solid. Lightning fast. Secure. No compromises.
_____________
The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential.
If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all
copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and
(iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any
message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons
other than the intended recipient. Thank you.
