Re: Balsa: Indirect linking to OpenSSL via LGPL and OpenLDAP libs

[Emmanuel <e allaud wanadoo fr>]

Le 2002.12.19 06:14, Carlos Morgado a écrit :
> 
> On 2002.12.19 09:20:50 +0000 Andrew Lau wrote:
>> Dear Peter,
>> 	So how should I go about trying to convince Balsa to add an
>> OpenSSL exclusion clause to its license? Doing so would not weaken 
>> any
>> protections that Balsa already has under the normal GPL. Would the
>> consent of the versions 2.0 authors (from file): Emmanuel Allaud,
>> Carlos Morgado, Pawel Salek and yourself (Peter Bloomfield) be 
>> enough?
>> 
> 
> I don't think there's a lot of convincing to do, I for one don't 
> opose it
> nor i think Pawel does (but he's otherwise busy so we haven't heard 
> much
> from him). Peter doesn't seem to mind, Emmanuel ?

For me it's OK. I also don't think this exclusion clause will weaken 
the "freeness" of Balsa. At least we can do that now, and if it turns 
out that it was a mistake we will have to find a totally free 
alternative to OpenSSL. Moreover I think that OpenSSL has this licence 
style mostly because of cryptographic certification problems, or am I 
wrong? (this is a bit HS).

Bye
Manu