On Mon, 23 Feb 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote: > [snip] > I am not a lawyer but I do have twenty+ years worth of talking to > lawyers and dealing with issues like this. While I would never > arbitrarily decide that an iffy package could legally be included, it is > clearly in Red Hat's best interest to err on the side of caution and > remove gnupg from the distro especially now that the issue was publicly > discussed on a mailing list. > > cgf
FWIW, I agree with CGF's decision and the above reasoning, and did read his initial e-mail announcing that he's pulling gnupg (and ccrypt) as a temporary pull pending legal counsel, not as a permanent block (all my reply jokes nonwithstanding). The suggestion of distributing the sources and compiling during postinstall (implied by me but actually voiced by Jörg) was a temporary measure until the binary distribution questions could be resolved. I don't want to add oil to the fire or flog a dead horse here, but a lot of these questions are addressed in the Mozilla Crypto FAQ (<http://www.mozilla.org/crypto-faq.html>), in addition to the links I posted in <http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2004-02/msg00251.html>. Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ [EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! "I have since come to realize that being between your mentor and his route to the bathroom is a major career booster." -- Patrick Naughton
