On Mon, 2006-05-01 at 17:53 +0200, Bas Wijnen wrote: > On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 05:00:26PM +0200, Pierre THIERRY wrote:
> > There *are* legitimate cases where you want a technical solution to > > enforce some security policy. > > Yes. But some other cases, such as DRM to protect copyright, have > unreasonable side-effects. We do not need to support such things IMO. I just want to be very clear what you are saying. You are saying that the DRM issue is *so* important that you cannot imagine some other use case for encapsulation and/or identification that would lead you to accept these features, correct? If so, this is good. I think this is the heart of the Hurd-purpose issue that must be decided. > > > Summary: I think this is a case of "we don't want to support this". > > > > Why? > > Because the only reason it is needed is to support development of non-free > software. Even more non-free than is currently possible, in fact. This is the question that we need to determine -- whether it is, in fact, useful only to support non-free software. Let us not assume the answer just yet. shap _______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
