Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ssmtp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188400 ------- Additional Comments From wolfy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2006-10-30 10:41 EST ------- In order to complete the submission of this package, I have just taken a deeper look at the patches included by debian/unstable since my first submission ssmtp package and a few questions have arisen. Patch number 8 switches from using openssl to gnutls, the reason behind the change being pointed in http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=374327. Quoting from there: "as written in debian/copyright ssmtp is now GPL. Your package is linked against OpenSSL, which is not licensed under the GPL, this is a license violation. Upstream should add an exception to the license (in COPYING) which allows the linking with OpenSSL, this you should also write in debian/copyright. The second choice would be to port ssmtp to gnutls which is GPL." Now the facts: - ssmtp is GPL (the original tar.gz includes the file named COPYING which is the GPLv2 license) - openssl is BSDish (quote from pm -q --qf "%{license}\n" openssl) - gnutls is LGPL I am far from being a legal expert (au contraire actually :) ) but I have just read the LICENSE file included in the openssl rpm package and I am not convinced at all about the need for the change. So. my question is: leaving aside the obvious "better to be in sync with upstream", is this change (openssl -> gnutls) really needed for FE ? Especially since ssmtp does NOT modify in any way the openssl toolkit, it just links against the libraries ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review