On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 10:06:24AM +0100, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote: > Donovan Baarda wrote: > >This patch keeps the current md5c.c, md5module.c files and adds the > >following; _hashopenssl.c, hashes.py, md5.py, sha.py. > [...] > >If all we wanted to do was fix the md5 module > > If we want to fix the licensing issues with the md5 module, this patch > does not help at all, as it keeps the current md5 module (along with > its licensing issues). So any patch to solve the problem will need > to delete the code with the questionable license. > > Then, the approach in the patch breaks the promise that the md5 module > is always there. It would require that OpenSSL is always there - a > promise that we cannot make (IMO).
I'm aware of that. My goals are primarily to get a good openssl based hashes/digest module going to be used instead of the built in implementations when openssl available because openssl is -so- much faster. Fixing the debian instigated md5 licensing issue is secondary and is something I'll get to later on after i work on the fun stuff. And as Donovan has said, the patch already does present debian with the option of dropping that md5 module and using the openssl derived one instead if they're desperate. based on laziness winning and the issue being so minor i hope they just wait for a patch from me that replaces the md5c.c with one of the acceptably licensed ones for their 2.3/2.4 packages. -g _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
