Hello,
On Oct 10, 2010, at 10:07 PM, Frank Morgner wrote:
1. There is no kind of abstraction in the current SM code. At the
moment every card driver implements its own version of secure
messaging. This leads to duplicated code. For example, what I saw
at the first glance is that every card
( As Spanish authorities finally said No-no to allow re-licensing GPL'd
DNIe code for inclusion in OpenSC, me an some others have started a
written-from-scratch OpenSC DNIe module. We are next to start writing
sm code... )
At lun, 11-10-2010 a las 09:56 +0300, Martin Paljak wrote:
[]
There
Hi all:
As you already know, Spanish authorities finally said no about the
possibility of re-licensing DNIe bits under LGPL for inclusion into
OpenSC.
So me and some others at spain have decided to start writing from
scratch a new OpenSC DNIe module under LGPL for inclusion into the
project.
Hello,
2010/10/11 Juan Antonio Martinez jons...@terra.es:
- What is the licensing politics for OpenSC modules?
* Need to assign copyright to OpenSC Project?
No
* Can we re-license as GPL for use outside the OpenSC scope?
Why would you need that?
DNIe bits are using GPLv3 (or GPLv3+ I have
El lun, 11-10-2010 a las 13:49 +0200, Ludovic Rousseau escribió:
Hello,
2010/10/11 Juan Antonio Martinez jons...@terra.es:
- What is the licensing politics for OpenSC modules?
* Need to assign copyright to OpenSC Project?
No
* Can we re-license as GPL for use outside the OpenSC scope?
