Also spracht Peter Amstutz (Mon, 11 Feb 2008 17:43:45 -0500): > With regard to shipping the private key, my thinking is that publishing > an API is like specifying a protocol, and that you really want a way of > unambigiously referring to a specific API as published by a specific > entity at a specific version.
Hmm... no, I don't think I for one want that. It would mean I can't make changes to third-party library from source A and still have third-party software from source B work against it without a manual hack-and- recompile. That would be against the spirit of Free Software, and the letter of the LGPLv3 (which I see you picked for s5 and I approve of). Yes, it would be nice to have a way of *referring* to a specific (...) as you say. But having all code by default *depend* on a specific version published by a specific entity? Bad idea, IMO. For the matter, I don't think Libraries should be distributed as a site, at all. I think they should just import the Library object into the local host (possibly inside some "safe" location like /otd or /libraries or even /lib). But it seems you have put some thought behind this decision; would you mind sharing your reasoning with us? best, Lalo Martins -- So many of our dreams at first seem impossible, then they seem improbable, and then, when we summon the will, they soon become inevitable. ----- http://lalomartins.info/ GNU: never give up freedom http://www.gnu.org/ _______________________________________________ vos-d mailing list email@example.com http://www.interreality.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vos-d