Paul Wise <p...@debian.org> writes: > On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 16:45 -0400, Simon Fondrie-Teitler wrote: > >> micah took a look at what I had today and noticed that it is using >> openssl, and is a GPL-3 project. I'm talking to upstream about getting >> an exception added to the license to resolve the license conflict. >> >> Related github issue: >> https://github.com/xray7224/PyPump/issues/101 > > Is this a regression from the version in unstable?
I don't think so. I'm honestly still trying to figure out how all of this fits together, and how the licenses work. The previous package didn't depend on it, and the suggestion to install pyopenssl is new, but it was never an explicit dependency. It's pulled in with the python support for TLS connections, so I'm fairly sure that if you had given it a https link in a previous version, it would have used the openssl code. The package is uploaded here: http://mentors.debian.net/package/python-pypump I'm also still trying to figure out the Debian policy towards python applications that are licensed under the GPL. My understanding is that any python code makes TLS connections ends up using code from the openssl library. Upstream is reluctant to add the clause, and points out that programs like offlineimap don't have this clause despite being GPL licensed and making TLS connections with python. If anyone could clarify, that would be helpful. Regards, Simon
pgpAgh2m6rxHO.pgp
Description: PGP signature
