Re: New License/Exception Request: CRYPTOGAMS

On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 11:01 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > Hi Philippe, > > Thanks for your response. > > On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 10:58 PM, Philippe Ombredanne > wrote: >> The way this is typically worded in OpenSSL and CRYPTOGRAMS would calls >> for this

Re: New License/Exception Request: CRYPTOGAMS

Hi Philippe, Thanks for your response. On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 10:58 PM, Philippe Ombredanne wrote: > The way this is typically worded in OpenSSL and CRYPTOGRAMS would calls > for this expression IMHO: > OpenSSL OR (BSD-3-Clause OR GPL-2.0) That sounds fine to me. I'm

Re: New License/Exception Request: CRYPTOGAMS

Jason: On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > Hey SPDX, > > A lot of older OpenSSL code is under the OpenSSL license, but the > author also provides it under GPLv2. Great. The SPDX identifier for > this is obvious. > > Faced with the multitude of requests

New License/Exception Request: CRYPTOGAMS

Hey SPDX, A lot of older OpenSSL code is under the OpenSSL license, but the author also provides it under GPLv2. Great. The SPDX identifier for this is obvious. Faced with the multitude of requests for adding this GPLv2 exception in the various interesting reusable files of OpenSSL, it appears