| Re: [chrony-dev] Support for another crypto hash? |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More chrony.tuxfamily.org/chrony-dev Archives
]
On Wed, 19 Oct 2011, Ed W wrote:
On 18/10/2011 23:52, Bill Unruh wrote:
???
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.
Thats because you seem determined to have an argument rather than doing
some research or even reading the links I'm emailing you?
??? The code carries its license with it. If a claimed license lies on another
site and is in conflict with the one in the source, I believe it is the one in the
source that applies. I do now find that there are in fact two "sources" for
libtomcrypt, muddying the waters still further.
From previous emails:
https://github.com/libtom/libtomcrypt/blob/master/LICENSE
Just do the research rather than arguing please? This is the second time posting this link? I even recommended google and doing some research in my last email, but you continue to make arguments without having information accessible in a very quick search!!
Look, I'm not a lawyer, I'm not telling you what is correct here, but I am asking you to argue from a position of education and I even made the resources available to get educated! Please read thoroughly through the facts and beyond that I really don't care what your final position is!
The problem is that even that "second license" is legally pretty terrible, as
I said before. It does not state that the license is non-revokable, or that it
passes on to anyone that obtains a copy from you. It is entirely unclear as to
what it means "do what the fuck you want" is not a legal term, and even in
colloquial speach it is ambiuous-- usually meaning -- don;t bother me with
your questions or requests for permission. Ie, it can be interpreted as
refusing to give permission. Thus the first license is not one at all -- it is
a statement of fact which is in fact false, and the second is "stop bothering
me". In either case those licenses are attrocious and certainly not worth it
for anyone to base anything on. Note that the writers of the GPL knew of the
potential legal problems and thus DID spend some time making sure they were
covered. The writers of the WTFPL did not.
In fact the license on the text of the license itself is a far better one than the
license, which is pretty ironic.
Now, do I advise not using the library? -- not necessarily. I do agree that the
chances of anyone bothering you, of suing you for using libtomcrypt, are very
small. Even of Tom or his heirs or successors revoking the license. However,
if I were someone who based anything worth any value on that library, I would
be hesitant to do so because of the license. Is chrony something of value? I
think so. Recall that this started because you advised that libtomcrypt be
used in chrony to impliment the crypto, and claiming that it was free of
licensing issues (it is public domain). My purpose was to point out that I do
not believe that to be true, and that Lichvar should keep that in mind when he
decides which library to use.
Please don't take offence at any of the above, I'm just frustrated that you won't read what has been sent to you
Regards
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.