Kai Storbeck writes:
>
> I'm a bit perplexed that the module authors have anything to do with
> this as long as they are clearly stating their code is released under
> the artistic license.
The license of the perl module is not the concern. The concern is that
we are violating the license of t
On Wed, 2012-27-06 at 23:13 +0200, Kai Storbeck wrote:
> I'm a bit perplexed that the module authors have anything to do with
> this as long as they are clearly stating their code is released under
> the artistic license.
This is my position, stated somewhat more clearly. The particular
license o
Hi guys,
Cheers for the elaborate thread that emerged from my graveyard bump.
Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> It seems like the CPAN module authors are going to have to be involved
> ("harrassed") somehow, unless "openssl" is considered sufficiently
> different from "OpenSSL" to invalidate stanza 5
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 02:32:23PM -0400, Guy Hulbert wrote:
> Perhaps you should first get written permission to use the OpenSSL
> string in this email thread.
Who are you?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm
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 *compi
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
On Wed, 2012-27-06 at 13:42 -0400, Mike O'Connor wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 12:52:28PM -0400, Guy Hulbert wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-27-06 at 12:49 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> > > On 06/27/2012 12:38 PM, Guy Hulbert wrote:
> > > > It's unenforcable if the modules in question do not incor
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 12:52:28PM -0400, Guy Hulbert wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-27-06 at 12:49 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> > On 06/27/2012 12:38 PM, Guy Hulbert wrote:
> > > It's unenforcable if the modules in question do not incorporate any
> > > OpenSSL code and are just an interface to the l
On Wed, 2012-27-06 at 12:49 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On 06/27/2012 12:38 PM, Guy Hulbert wrote:
> > It's unenforcable if the modules in question do not incorporate any
> > OpenSSL code and are just an interface to the library. I think this is
> > probably the case.
>
> Eh? How is a b
On 06/27/2012 12:38 PM, Guy Hulbert wrote:
> It's unenforcable if the modules in question do not incorporate any
> OpenSSL code and are just an interface to the library. I think this is
> probably the case.
Eh? How is a binding to a library not a project that is "derived from"
that library? I
On Wed, 2012-27-06 at 10:03 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> Given that the perl modules in question clearly contain "OpenSSL" in
> their names, this appears to only be satisfied under one of the
> following conditions:
>
> 0) a perl module is not a "product"
> 1) these perl modules are not "
On 06/27/2012 09:00 AM, Guy Hulbert wrote:
> It depends what "derived from this software" means. The only protection
> "OpenSSL" has, in itself, would be as a trademark.
I don't think this is the case, but i could be wrong. Trademark would
be used to keep someone from marketing and unrelated pro
On Wed, 2012-27-06 at 07:27 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
[snip]
> I don't believe #534338 covered Crypt::OpenSSL::AES. However, i do
> wonder whether Crypt::OpenSSL::AES has received permission from the
> OpenSSL upstrem for the use of the term "OpenSSL" in its name, as
> referred to at:
>
>
On 06/27/2012 05:26 AM, Kai wrote:
> I was searching for the package libcrypt-openssl-aes-perl. With some
> wildcards I
> stumbled upon this wnpp bug.
>
> Was my package (Crypt::OpenSSL::AES) included in your wnpp, or should I
> create a
> new wnpp bug for this?
I don't believe #534338 covered
Hi Daniel,
I was searching for the package libcrypt-openssl-aes-perl. With some wildcards I
stumbled upon this wnpp bug.
Was my package (Crypt::OpenSSL::AES) included in your wnpp, or should I create a
new wnpp bug for this?
Thanks for your input.
Regards,
Kai Storbeck
signature.asc
Descript
On 06/23/2009 02:52 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> Finally, i note that the OpenSSL license contains the following stanza:
>
> * 5. Products derived from this software may not be called "OpenSSL"
> *nor may "OpenSSL" appear in their names without prior written
> *permission of the Ope
16 matches
Mail list logo
