[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: releasing LGPL version of opencdk?

From: Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
Subject: Re: releasing LGPL version of opencdk?
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2008 20:01:10 +0300
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20080227)

Simon Josefsson wrote:
Timo Schulz <address@hidden> writes:

Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
Simon Josefsson wrote:

Regarding naming, on second thought, I think it would be better to avoid
having 'gnutls' in the name of the LGPL package since it would be
confusing if any non-gnutls projects to link with it.
I also like the lite version better :)
I've to agree, that the 'gnutls' part might confuse user.
So it's settled, we use the 'libopencdk-lite' name :-).

It seems the savannah people do not like project names that contain

How do you feel about using 'freecdk'?  This let us avoid the -lite
suffix which is nice.  Or 'minicdk'?

We also have another problem I found during my migration to generic crypto functions. Since opencdk does crypto by itself it has (at least the included version) to call the gnutls API generic functions also, otherwise it will not be possible to completely offer a version compiled with another crypto library.

For this reason I'd suggest to consider making it (the tiny part) a part of gnutls. The generic API to use would be the exported gnutls _openpgp_ API. What do you think of this?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]