Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 20:08:12 -0400 (EDT) From: Matt Behrens <matt@zigg.com> To: Allen Smith <easmith@beatrice.rutgers.edu> Cc: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>, "Gregory P. Smith" <greg@nas.nasa.gov>, Igor Roshchin <igor@physics.uiuc.edu>, security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ssh protocol [was: Interesting problem: chowning files sent via FTP] Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9904122006480.8372-100000@megaweapon.zigg.com> In-Reply-To: <9904121656.ZM5526@beatrice.rutgers.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
While LGPL is certainly acceptable, code being put under the BSD license does not mean it hasn't been reviewed by independent folk. (Hmm, aren't we on a list that discusses some rather oft-reviewed BSD-licensed software?) :-) On Mon, 12 Apr 1999, Allen Smith wrote: : On Apr 12, 4:30pm, Brett Glass (possibly) wrote: : > A GPLed implementation would be a bad idea, because it would prevent : > the code from being incorporated into commercial products and thus : > discourage standardization. This is one situation in which BSD-type : > licensing would be infinitely preferable. : : Actually, what would be preferable is some form of GNU _library_ license. I'm : not willing to trust an encryption program unless I know independent : cryptographers have reviewed the code. Matt Behrens <matt@zigg.com> Owner/Administrator, zigg.com Chief Engineer, Nameless IRC Network To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.9904122006480.8372-100000>