On Wed August 29 2007 8:30:09 am Michail Bachmann wrote: > I have read the whole thread and it seems to me the licensing concerns > will be resolved soon. IMO in the mean time it would be easier to keep the > openssl dependency so this package can be tested (by us at least).
If the licensing is in doubt, we can't do that. We must test it as it will be released. I don't actually anticipate any change in the licensing situation any time soon at this time. > > > I will add this to NEWS.Debian to make it more prominent. > > Yes, please. Or temporarily revert the change ;-) > > The change is pretty invasive, since dropping the encryption support means > even if we disable the encryption before upgrading all backup clients it > will be impossible for us to restore any files which were be stored before > the change. The version of Bacula in stable did not support encrypted backups. It did use OpenSSL, but only for network communication. This particular problem will only be impacting people that are tracking testing or unstable. Of course, the communication problem could impact users of stable, which is why I'll add the note to NEWS.Debian. Debian does not officially support testing -> testing or unstable -> unstable upgrades. (That's why these are called "Testing" and "unstable") I'll also note in README.Debian how people that wish to use encryption can build their own debs. -- John -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
