Relicensing of software is particularlyĬhallenging in that all contributors need to agree (not just to notĭisagree) for it to be valid. signatureout signature signatureout OpenSSL::Digest::SHA256. It's unlikely that such a relicensing will be seen as valid, particularlyīecause they've gone from the "If we don't hear of any objections then Im not sure which of these SecVerifyTransformCreate is expecting (the binary digest, a hex representation of the digest, or the original un-digested content), but none of them work. Since ASL v2 is incompatible with GPL2, some projects may seek to use dual
#Openssl licensing code#
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: Redistributions of source code must retain the. both the conditions of the OpenSSL License and the original SSLeay license apply to the toolkit. both the conditions of the OpenSSL License and the original SSLeay license apply to the toolkit. The OpenSSL toolkit stays under a double license, i.e. Sent by:, at 02:03, Joy Keys via swift-server-dev wrote: The OpenSSL toolkit stays under a dual license, i.e. Subject: Re: OpenSSL re-licensesing to ASL v2 Having said that, the OpenSSL license is alreadyįairly permissive - it just requires you to provide a PUT to cover its If they can carry this off, and the change can be seen as legally valid, Since ASL v2 is incompatible with GPL2, some projects may seek to use dual license MIT/ASL v2.
On, at 02:03, Joy Keys via swift-server-dev wrote:
See also Theo's trolling of relicensing GCC to ISC: And in that particular case, the only way they achieved that was to denote EPL as being a subsequent version of CPL, because they couldn't get positive permission from everyone. 'we give a license to relicense') the only ones that I'm aware of are JUnit and Eclipse, both of which moved from CPL to EPL. There have been few situations where open-source software relicensing has gone ahead successfully other than projects which have CLAs (i.e. Relicensing of software is particularly challenging in that all contributors need to agree (not just to not disagree) for it to be valid. As part of this effort, the OpenSSL team launched a new website and has. SAN FRANCISCO, Ma The OpenSSL project, home of the world’s most popular SSL/TLS and cryptographic toolkit, is changing its license to the Apache License v 2.0 (ASL v2). It's unlikely that such a relicensing will be seen as valid, particularly because they've gone from the "If we don't hear of any objections then we'll assume that means yes". OpenSSL Launches New Website to Organize Process, Seeks to Contact All Contributors.
0 kommentar(er)
