Mathieu Roy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > En réponse à Rudy Gevaert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > Can someone give an answer to this? > > > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 09:01:22PM -0400, Walter Landry wrote: > > > Rudy Gevaert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I'm evaluating the project you submitted for approval in Savannah. > > > > > > I just had another thought. I expect that in the near future, I will > > > be incorporating cryptographic routines into ArX. Export > > restrictions > > > can make life quite complicated. Is that going to be a problem for > > > Savannah? I can do the original bxa notification which should make > > > everything ok, but I don't know what Savannah policy is about crypto. > > I think that the software should work with and without crypto. > Users with the sources should be able to, when compiling the > software, activate it or not. Along with the sources, if you provide > binaries, you should provide binaries of both versions (with and > without crypto). The users will be able to, at their option, > according to their country's laws, use the appropriate version of > your software.
The problem is not whether a person can use crypto [1]. The problem is whether Savannah is willing to serve as a place where crypto is going to be exported. Debian went through a long, painful process before they decided to do that. Thanks, Walter Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED] [1] I didn't think this was a problem anymore. It used to be a problem in France, but that situation has improved. _______________________________________________ Savannah-hackers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/savannah-hackers