On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 10:42:15AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > > > > Since git has no OpenSSL link exception the resulting binary wouldn't be > > distributable AFAIK. > > For crazy people who think that regular libraries can change the copyright > status of a program (not so), you can always decide to build without > OpenSSL and use the included Mozilla-based SHA1 implementation for git. > > Performance will probably suffer, and maybe something else breaks too (I > doubt many people test the build that way very often), but I assume Debian > people don't care. > > After all, if you're a Debian person, it's likely more important to you to > be difficult and anal and argue about theoretical license details than > actually be *usable*. Easy to say for someone who only distributes source code... (AFAIK anyway) Anyway, since Debian will not change its opinion about this, my answer was in the context of the question obviously useful. Whether it was generally correct is probably off-topic here. Gruesse, -- Frank Lichtenheld <frank@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> www: http://www.djpig.de/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
