Re: [vchkpw] OT: tcpserver and rblsmtpd clones
On 2006-10-26, at 1737, David Chaplin-Loebell wrote: John Simpson wrote: i don't really mind either way, but i'd like to know what his policy is, just to be sure. before you pointed out this page this i was not aware of 2007-01-01 having any significance (other than "new years day", obviously.) He periodically updates those dates. I think the point is that he doesn't want prerelease versions of his software distributed forever-- but if you check out http://web.archive.org/web/*/http:// cr.yp.to/distributors.html you'll see that those dates have been pushed forward several times. okay. thanks again. -- | John M. Simpson - KG4ZOW - Programmer At Large | | http://www.jms1.net/ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | -- | Mac OS X proves that it's easier to make UNIX | | pretty than it is to make Windows secure. | -- PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [vchkpw] OT: tcpserver and rblsmtpd clones
John Simpson wrote: i don't really mind either way, but i'd like to know what his policy is, just to be sure. before you pointed out this page this i was not aware of 2007-01-01 having any significance (other than "new years day", obviously.) He periodically updates those dates. I think the point is that he doesn't want prerelease versions of his software distributed forever-- but if you check out http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://cr.yp.to/distributors.html you'll see that those dates have been pushed forward several times. David
Re: [vchkpw] OT: tcpserver and rblsmtpd clones
On 2006-10-26, at 1454, David Chaplin-Loebell wrote: John Simpson wrote: i've heard it said that all of djb's other software is essentially public domain, but now i'm curious and would like know for sure. has anybody heard or seen any kind of statement from djb about this, and if so where can i find a copy of it? Most of his software is not public domain. (Several of his math and crypto libraries are, but to my knowledge none of the networking software is). First, there's a copyright statement in the README file of each package. Second: http://cr.yp.to/distributors.html Daemontools is explicitly mentioned here-- he licenses the current version to be distributed (in package form, with a specific MD5 checksum) until the beginning of 2007. ah. i had only seen the qmail-specific version of this page, http:// cr.yp.to/qmail/dist.html ... you have answered my question, thank you. next question, and this may be better directed to djb himself (hence the CC to him.) i build servers for my clients, and i carry around a USB memory stick which contains, among other things, the source code packages for daemontools and ucspi-tcp. does this mean that starting in january i'm going to have to manually download the packages from his server instead of copying them from my USB stick when i build a client's machine? i don't really mind either way, but i'd like to know what his policy is, just to be sure. before you pointed out this page this i was not aware of 2007-01-01 having any significance (other than "new years day", obviously.) -- | John M. Simpson - KG4ZOW - Programmer At Large | | http://www.jms1.net/ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | -- | Mac OS X proves that it's easier to make UNIX | | pretty than it is to make Windows secure. | -- PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [vchkpw] OT: tcpserver and rblsmtpd clones
John Simpson wrote: i've heard it said that all of djb's other software is essentially public domain, but now i'm curious and would like know for sure. has anybody heard or seen any kind of statement from djb about this, and if so where can i find a copy of it? Most of his software is not public domain. (Several of his math and crypto libraries are, but to my knowledge none of the networking software is). First, there's a copyright statement in the README file of each package. Second: http://cr.yp.to/distributors.html Daemontools is explicitly mentioned here-- he licenses the current version to be distributed (in package form, with a specific MD5 checksum) until the beginning of 2007. Third: http://cr.yp.to/softwarelaw.html In other words, DJB has the right to control distribution of his software and he specifically asserts that right. David
Re: [vchkpw] OT: tcpserver and rblsmtpd clones
On 2006-10-26, at 0441, tonix (Antonio Nati) wrote: Does anyone know about good clones/substitutes of tcpserver and rblsmtpd? I'ld like they to have a more open licensing, so developing and deployment of new integrated features could be more easy. (sorry for going even further off topic) i don't see anything in the ucspi-tcp source package, or on djb's web site, which indicates the kind of license under which the ucspi-tcp package is distributed. i know we've probably all seen http://cr.yp.to/qmail/dist.html but that only applies to qmail. i've heard it said that all of djb's other software is essentially public domain, but now i'm curious and would like know for sure. has anybody heard or seen any kind of statement from djb about this, and if so where can i find a copy of it? -- | John M. Simpson - KG4ZOW - Programmer At Large | | http://www.jms1.net/ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | -- | Mac OS X proves that it's easier to make UNIX | | pretty than it is to make Windows secure. | -- PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[vchkpw] OT: tcpserver and rblsmtpd clones
Sorry for the off topic. Does anyone know about good clones/substitutes of tcpserver and rblsmtpd? I'ld like they to have a more open licensing, so developing and deployment of new integrated features could be more easy. Thanks, Tonino
