[cl-plus-ssl-devel] Fwd: Re: Bug#394161: ITP: cl-plus-ssl -- A simple Common Lisp interface to OpenSSL

[Peter Van Eynde]

On Sunday 22 October 2006 15:38, David Lichteblau wrote:
> Have you considered just patching CL+SSL in Debian to load GNU TLS
> instead of OpenSSL for now?  Technically, that should not be difficult,
> since CL+SSL uses only few SSL functions.  (Or does GNU TLS lack the
> whole BIO structure thing?  Although I wrote the code interfacing with
> that, I am aware that it isn't perfectly reliable yet anyway, so we
> could disable it.) And as far as the license is concerned, although
> upstream CL+SSL tries to be usable with commercial Lisp software through
> use of the LLGPL preamble, use of GNU TLS would only downgrade that
> license to plain LGPL, which shouldn't be a problem for the free
> software included with Debian.  (right?)


I've tried to do this with another ssl library and gotten into some problems, 
but I have not tried it with cl-plus-ssl yet.  But now that I've seen your 
message I don't think I will even try, as I think that the Lisp addition to 
the LGPL is pretty much a requirement. In a CL world the LGPL is too 
infectious :-S.


> Yes, I know.  That is also why Debian folks say they cannot upgrade
> their ancient libldap 2.1.  "Because OpenSSL is GPL incompatible."

Ai. Painful.

> PS Hopefully Nathan Froyd's Ironclad will soon grow a native Lisp
> implementation of SSL so that we can forget about all of this.... ;-)

;-)


Groetjes, Peter

-- 
signature -at- pvaneynd.mailworks.org 
http://www.livejournal.com/users/pvaneynd/
"God, root, what is difference?" Pitr | "God is more forgiving." Dave Aronson|