Dominique Dumont d...@debian.org writes:
Le jeudi 21 février 2013 23:12:28, vous avez écrit :
It looks like the license of GNUTLS 3.1.x may eventually be
changed from LGPLv3+ back to LGPLv2.1+. If that succeeds,
I believe it would solve the incompatibility with Pan.
Le Saturday 23 March 2013 12:57:27, vous avez écrit :
Gnutls 3.1.10 now has LGPLv2.1+ again.
http://lists.gnutls.org/pipermail/gnutls-devel/2013-March/006202.html
Thanks for the heads up.
I've notified upstream Pan. I'll put back Gnutls in Pan once this version of
gnutls is available in
Le jeudi 21 février 2013 23:12:28, vous avez écrit :
It looks like the license of GNUTLS 3.1.x may eventually be
changed from LGPLv3+ back to LGPLv2.1+. If that succeeds,
I believe it would solve the incompatibility with Pan.
Dominique Dumont domi.dum...@free.fr writes:
I'll put back SSL support for Pan in Debian unstable once the problematic
code
is relicensed or re-written.
It looks like the license of GNUTLS 3.1.x may eventually be
changed from LGPLv3+ back to LGPLv2.1+. If that succeeds,
I believe it would
Le mardi 12 février 2013 14:26:18, Dominique Dumont a écrit :
Since this is the first time I'm dealing with a trciky licensing issue,
I'd like some folks from debian-legal mailing list to confirm my opinion.
As mentioned here [1], my proposal is a bad idea. GPL license is transitive.
Since
5 matches
Mail list logo
