Hi Andreas-- On 10/26/2013 02:24 AM, Andreas Metzler wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 09:56:58AM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: >>> btw, it's not clear to me why we --disable-libdane -- I see that it was >>> set (along with --without-tpm) in 3.1.3-1, but i don't see the reason >>> for it. could that be clarified someplace? > > --without-tpm had some license rationale, --disable-libdane might have > been related to licensing (I think it was one of the leftover LGPLv3 > GnuTLS parts at this time and I have not completely given up on a > LGPLv2+ GnuTLS stack.). If there is *strong* interest in libdane I can > doublecheck and enable if feasible (or else document).
I am interested in libdane, and would like to know what the rationale
is. I'd also be curious to know more about "some license rationale" for
--without-tpm, though i consider TPM of much lower interest compared to
DANE.
Thanks for all your ongoing work on gnutls for debian.
--dkg
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
