Re: [Monotone-devel] encrypted monotone (and digression on

[Jeronimo Pellegrini]

On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 12:21:46PM -0700, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> Well, umm, blame cmarcelo, I guess :-):
>   http://del.icio.us/tag/monotone

Ah, right. That's Caio.

> As a practical matter, I find it unlikely that the FSF will release a
> GPL v3 that somehow cannot be applied to, say... gnupg.
> 
> Consult a lawyer etc. etc., but personally I'd just slap "v2 or later"
> on it and worry about v3... later.  Like, after it actually exists
> :-).

I think you're right. I'm a bit of a paranoid when it comes to legal
issues, but OK -- GPL v2 it is!

> (In the mean time, a number of people, myself included, will not want
> to look at any non-free code, regardless of author's expressed plans.)

I never had the intention to make it non-free. It's just that I wasn't
OK with that problem (in particular, since the system could be used to
encrypt source code, this could be a problem -- but I'll just use teh
GPL anyway)

> Ah, makes sense -- so it is push/pull only?  What do you do to allow
> incremental pull?  (Or do you?  And if not, how does it differ from
> gpg --encrypt foo.mtn? ;-))

Actually, it converts your ordinary database to an encrypted one (so you
keep both on your desktop/laptop/whatever). When you synchronize, you
use the encrypted database. In untrusted hosts you can keep only the
encrypted one (the keys won't ever get there, since they're not
necessary for syncing).
Since the packets are individual files in the encrypted database, when
they are synced only the relevant ones are transmitted.

I'll work more on that page and on packaging the code later. Right now
the site is probably not up to date with the work, and I'm not sure if
the mtn server is working there. (Have to work a lot on another project
now, can't stop!)

J.