[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: monit and SSL

From: Mark Ferlatte
Subject: Re: monit and SSL
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 07:56:29 -0700
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

Jan-Henrik Haukeland said on Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 12:29:20PM +0200:
> From reading the discussions via the link you sent, this looks like a
> self inflicted problem created by interpreting the GPL rather strict
> or uber-conservative. If it was up to me I would simply choose to
> define this as a non-problem - much like what Linus Torvalds did when
> Richard Stallman said that using properitary closed source programs on
> Linux was an infringement of the GPL. Stallman, that fucking JERK,
> felt that proprietary programs should not run on a OS released under
> the GPL license. If he got his way, Linux would have been reduced to a
> footnote in computer history.
You, as the software author and holder of copyright, are allowed to define this
as a non-problem.  The Debian project can't, and has to interpret the licenses
as they are written, as opposed to what they believe that the author wishes.
Sucks sometimes.  Too bad we don't have a license that just says "link with
what you want, do what you want, just give me modifications back so that I can
make the system better".

> licensing problem. Of course, if you think it will help we will
> probably be willing to add any additional statements in the monit
> LICENSE as suggested by the OpenSSL project, like; "This program is
> released under the GPL with the additional exemption that compiling,
> linking, and/or using OpenSSL is allowed."

This is all that is necessary; there are a ton of projects that are "GPL with
OpenSSL link exception".


Attachment: pgpjpzET6RTHr.pgp
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]