From: Chris Adams <cmadams@xxxxxxxxxx> > The OpenSSL license is an old-style BSD type license with the > advertising clause, which I understand to be incompatible with the GPL. > That's part of why some programs are moving to the (LGPLed) GNU TLS > library instead. Ack, you're right. My apologies. > If it requires random services to link or include the code, it should > probably be BSD (non-advertising clause). Otherwise, things like Oracle > won't be able to start at boot. I think LGPL on those sections will do. I'm not a huge fan of BSD, at least for core details, because it's a leechable license. I can understand it in the case of Class libraries for Mono where vendors are freely sharing amongst each other. But the core system and libraries are GPL and LGPL. -- Bryan J. Smith b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx --------------------------------------------------------------------- It is mathematically impossible for someone who makes more than you to be anything but richer than you. Any tax rate that penalizes them will also penalize you similarly (to those below you, and then below them). Linear algebra, let alone differential calculus or even ele- mentary concepts of limits, is mutually exclusive with US journalism. So forget even attempting to explain how tax cuts work. ;-> -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
