Re: [Jessie-discuss] Re: RFC: merging GNU Crypto and Jessie

[Anthony Green]

On Sun, 2005-12-11 at 12:40 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> As far as I know even the "hooks" fall under this. Although I am not
> against having some configure options to put parts of the core library
> into standards.omit I don't think it is really needed. When the first
> parts of GNU Crypto was merged into GNU Classpath (and indirectly into
> GCC and other projects) FSF legal made sure that all FSF distributed GNU
> software would be able to be distributed (as source) from ftp.gnu.org
> from mirrors. See the statement on savannah:
> https://savannah.gnu.org/faq/?admin=&group_id=5802&question=Savannah_-_Is_there_any_restriction_on_cryptographic_software.txt
> Similar notices have been placed on ftp.gnu.org and other distribution
> sites (ftp://ftp.gnu.org/CRYPTO.README). We really don't need more then
> that as long as we distribute GNU Classpath as Free Software.

You're missing my point, which is that _I_ have a requirement to
redistribute GNU Classpath with no export-restricted software.  What's
good enough for the FSF is not good enough for me.  It would nice if
there was a convenient way of doing this.  Merging GNU Crypto into GNU
Classpath without regards to this issue is moving in a bad direction for
me (and perhaps others).

AG