License for nnrpd's SSL support
rra at stanford.edu
Sun Jul 30 04:35:08 UTC 2000
In looking through the INN tree today, I noticed that nnrpd/tls.c and
nnrpd/sasl_config.c claim to be under the GPL. That actually poses a
licensing problem for INN, since we can't include GPL'd code without
releasing all of INN under the GPL, which we don't want to do. I'm
guessing that you'd put the GPL on those files without realizing that.
Would it be possible to either change the license on those files to the
same as the license of INN, or to add an exception clause that allows
these files to be distributed as part of INN under the same terms as INN?
As the original author, you can do either, and neither interferes with you
also distributing the work separately under the GPL if you wish.
Also, I notice that the comments indicate that a few of the routines are
based on OpenSSL code. If this is correct, we need to correctly attribute
those portions as that too affects the license. OpenSSL's license is very
similar to INN's, and includes a requirement that packages that include it
mention that fact in their licensing; if we're using code from it, I'd
like to at least mention that prominently in README and give the credit
that they ask for.
Thanks for your help!
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
More information about the inn-workers