From: David R. M. <dr...@fi...> - 2010-06-29 15:05:03
|
On Jun 29, 2010, at 3:48 AM, Max Horn wrote: > > Am 29.06.2010 um 04:51 schrieb Benjamin Reed: > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> On 6/28/10 10:35 PM, David R. Morrison wrote: >>> Dear fink-core and friends, >>> >>> For various reasons, I am contemplating moving the crypto tree so >>> that it becomes a subdirectory of main, just like base, devel, etc. >>> In other words, the contents of crypto/finkinfo would be moved to >>> main/finkinfo/crypto . I think that move itself could be made >>> without causing any trouble -- does anybody see any difficulties with >>> it? >> >> Nope, sounds good to me. > > Same here. Though, I have to wonder on whether this also implies any policy changes? Would we still over -ssl and non-ssl variants of things? > Currently, policy says that if you depend on something in crypto, you must be in crypto. That policy would be changed. However, there is still an ssl mess, due to the license issue. In many cases, -ssl variants still need to be marked Restrictive. Since we don't have a mechanism for marking one variant in a single .info file Restrictive while keeping the other one at GPL or whatever, we will still need two .info files for some -ssl packages. And we might as well keep one of them in crypto (although not necessary, anymore, of course.) -- Dave |