Richard Laager writes:
> As I have said before: I think that computer programmers have a
> tendency to treat licenses as if they are self-executing (and precise
> like software).
Agreed, this is often a challenge when technical people discuss legal
matters, and it helps to keep this in mind.
>
Ansgar 🙀 writes:
> No, that is not the core problem. Debian, like most other binary
> distributions, heavily relies on the system library exception in many,
> many places.
I believe that is a fairly new (~5 years?) approach within Debian.
Debian used to treat OpenSSL incompatible with GPLv2 and
On 2025-04-15 at 05:58:42, Ansgar 🙀 wrote:
> Hi,
Hi,
> As Git doesn't seem any different, I think we should close this bug.
I agree with you that we should close the bug, which I did a few minutes
ago. I provided slightly different reasons in the close message, but I
agree this would cause a lo
Hi,
On Mon, 2025-04-14 at 16:18 -0500, Richard Laager wrote:
> On 2025-04-14 11:10, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > I do find it fairly hard to understand the logic behind a position that
> > somehow our git-remote-https binary as distributed is a derived work of
> > OpenSSL and thus violates the GPLv2 li
On 2025-04-14 11:10, Russ Allbery wrote:
I do find it fairly hard to understand the logic behind a position that
somehow our git-remote-https binary as distributed is a derived work of
OpenSSL and thus violates the GPLv2 license based on the nature of this
specific dependency chain, but then I wa
> "Chris" == Chris Hofstaedtler writes:
Chris> brian m. carlson (one of the git upstream copyright holders)
Chris> claims in Bug #1094969 that git cannot be distributed when
Chris> linked with OpenSSL. IIRC the Debian position is to use the
Chris> system library exception.
[T
> "Chris" == Chris Hofstaedtler writes:
Chris> brian m. carlson (one of the git upstream copyright holders)
Chris> claims in Bug #1094969 that git cannot be distributed when
Chris> linked with OpenSSL. IIRC the Debian position is to use the
Chris> system library exception.
T
Russ Allbery wrote:
> I think the situation here is this dependency chain:
>
> libcurl-gnutls -> libldap2 -> libssl
>
> (There may be others; I didn't do a thorough check. Does anyone know if
> there's a tool that will recursively analyze a binary's NEEDED sections
> and build a human-readabl
Andreas Metzler writes:
> well, we have decided to use the system library exception because we
> thought we had the right to so, not because we hoped that no copyright
> holder would notice. Undoing this for specific packages where a
> copyright holders tells us he disagrees undermines this posit
On 14/04/2025 11:14 am, Andreas Metzler wrote:
On 2025-04-13 Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
brian m. carlson (one of the git upstream copyright holders) claims
in Bug #1094969 that git cannot be distributed when linked with
OpenSSL. IIRC the Debian position is to use the system library
exception.
I
On 2025-04-13 Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> brian m. carlson (one of the git upstream copyright holders) claims
> in Bug #1094969 that git cannot be distributed when linked with
> OpenSSL. IIRC the Debian position is to use the system library
> exception.
> Indeed our /usr/lib/git-core/git-remot
brian m. carlson (one of the git upstream copyright holders) claims
in Bug #1094969 that git cannot be distributed when linked with
OpenSSL. IIRC the Debian position is to use the system library
exception.
Indeed our /usr/lib/git-core/git-remote-https links against
libssl.so.3, probably via li
12 matches
Mail list logo
