On Wed, 2012-27-06 at 14:25 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > On 06/27/2012 01:54 PM, Guy Hulbert wrote: > > Define "derivative". Until it's compiled, it's not. > > Right. Unfortunately for debian, and any other binary distributor of > CPAN modules, we distribute it compiled. > > > Tha *compiler*. So it might be a problem for Debian except that Debian > > is NOT using the string "OpenSSL". It is using the lower-case version. > > So there's no violation ... though IANAL. > > Wow, there's a way to thread the needle that hadn't occurred to me. Was > this what you were trying to point out before? I have my doubts about
I had not thought carefully initially the whole discussion is so ridiculous on its face that I just reacted. I told you once you could ignore me. > the legitimacy of the case of the package name as a differentiator, > frankly, but i suppose that's one approach to take. Should we also > change the case of the man pages and the paths to the .pm files? This is clearly ridiculous. I was just referring to the debian package name. I thought that was obvious from context. > > > IMO, if Debian is to do anything, it should first contact the "OpenSSL > > Project" to see if there's a problem. Harassing CPAN authors seems > > premature to me. > > I'm not sure how the debian project can ask the OpenSSL project for > written permission to use the string in these projects, since: Perhaps you should first get written permission to use the OpenSSL string in this email thread. [snip] -- --gh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1340821943.26197.79.ca...@cray.home.cotef.net
