On Mar 31, 2009, at 09:09, Anders F Björklund wrote:
Using the MacPorts version of OpenSSL has a licensing problem with
GPL ports, though... When distributing package binaries, that is.
Oh. Good. Grief.
So when we get going on binaries, we're going to have to provide
portfile syntax to indicate whether we may distribute binaries of the
built thing?
Sheesh.
Like http://www.finkproject.org/doc/packaging/policy.php?
phpLang=en#openssl
That says use of OpenSSL with GPL-licensed software is questionable.
It says Fink won't distribute such binaries, and implies users
building from source are no better off, legally. To me, this says
that if there is a problem for MacPorts to distribute binaries
including OpenSSL support, then the problem exists for all users of
MacPorts using these ports, regardless of whether it was provided as
a binary or compiled by the user.
http://www.openssl.org/support/faq.html#LEGAL2 (using system
openssl is ok)
That doesn't seem to prohibit the use of OpenSSL for us. It says
nothing about binaries. It says "the GPL does not place restrictions
on using libraries that are part of the normal operating system
distribution". OpenSSL is part of the normal Mac OS X distribution.
It says "Some GPL software copyright holders claim that you infringe
on their rights if you use OpenSSL with their software on operating
systems that don't normally include OpenSSL." Mac OS X does normally
include OpenSSL, so I don't see any problem here. But, I'm not a lawyer.
The situation might be different for people who use MacPorts on other
operating systems that don't come with OpenSSL. Not sure what that OS
would be. But I have no plans to provide binaries for anything other
than Mac OS X.
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
