| Re: [chrony-dev] Support for another crypto hash? |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More chrony.tuxfamily.org/chrony-dev Archives
]
On Tue, 18 Oct 2011, Ed W wrote:
On 18/10/2011 20:30, Bill Unruh wrote:
On Tue, 18 Oct 2011, Ed W wrote:
Please don't lets argue this further. Point is that there exists some
slug of code to compute hashes, that you can do with absolutely whatever
you wish.
While it is true that there exists some slug of code, and while it is
true
that the author of that code has indicated that he now feels you can do
whatever you want with it, that neither means he cannot change his
mind, nor
that the courts could not declare his statement of his intentions null
and
void. Now, you can then certainly act on the assumption that evenif it
is null
and void, he, or his executors, or whoever he in future assigns his
copyrights
to, will not in fact sue you. And I agree that that is probably a good
bet. But once you
have imbedded the code inside your own code, it may, or may not, be
areal pain
to have to rip it out in that perhaps unlikely future.
It would be far better if he simply stated that he renouces all copyright
rights, and irrevocably licenses anyone to copy it and gives others
the rights
to copy it as well.
I really don't get why you are trying to argue black is white here.
1) The author is very clear with his intent
2) The 2nd licence is an approved GPL compatible licence
3) The 2nd licence is actually written by the guy who was the Debian
project lead from 2007-2008
???
I downloaded libtomcrypt-1.17 which has a file in it called LICENSE.
The contents of that file are
"LibTomCrypt is public domain. As should all quality software be.
Tom St Denis"
It is that license that I am discussing.
I have no idea what this "2nd license" is.
see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTFPL
I agree that is a license. It is still not very good, because it is does not
say it is not revokable, and it does not say that the user can relicense it.
It just says that the recipient can do what they want with it.
It is an attempt to be legally casual, (as the language illustrates) but there
is one think in legal things you do NOT want to be is casual.
Note that it also maintains copyright control, as it states that derivative
works must carry a different name. If it really were in the public domain that
condition could not be placed on a derivative work since they would have no
copyright control over the work. Ie, they are trying to eat their cake and
have it at the same time. "We give up all copyright but we control what you
can call it using copyright law".
Also, it is NOT what Tom uses as far as I can see. If you
have other information, it would be good to point it out.
WTFPL occurs in none of the files in the above version, which is that latest
version on the http://libtom.org/?page=features&whatfile=crypt site.
Note that any other versions are controlled by the license that Tom put on his
project first. He owns the copyright.
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#WTFPL
http://sam.zoy.org/wtfpl/
Better minds than ours have argued this to death. Please use google for
a bit before arguing this further?
Yes, I read the code.
My opinion is that the code is as unencumbered with restrictions as you
can get...
Unfortunately not. The copyright is owned by Tom.
Ed W
---
To unsubscribe email chrony-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe" in the subject.
For help email chrony-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with "help" in the subject.
Trouble? Email listmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
--
William G. Unruh | Canadian Institute for| Tel: +1(604)822-3273
Physics&Astronomy | Advanced Research | Fax: +1(604)822-5324
UBC, Vancouver,BC | Program in Cosmology | unruh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Canada V6T 1Z1 | and Gravity | www.theory.physics.ubc.ca/
---
To unsubscribe email chrony-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe" in the subject.
For help email chrony-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with "help" in the subject.
Trouble? Email listmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.