[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111215103544.GA4212@openwall.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 14:35:44 +0400
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: cracking RADIUS shared secrets with john the ripper
Hi Didier,
I am sorry for the delay on this.
On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 07:48:02PM +0100, Didier Arenzana wrote:
> I had not think of the problem that could this change raise. I intend
> to change the license in this way, removing reference to binary
> builds, since it does not really male sense for a utility perl script
> :
>
> "Redistribution and use in source form, with or without modification,
> are permitted,
> as long as the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
> duplicated in all such forms"
>
> Would this be ok ?
No, this is worse than what you wrote originally. Besides requiring
attribution, now you also disallow binary builds, including of derived
versions (which might be in a language other than Perl). Now this is
definitely incompatible e.g. with GNU GPL.
Alexander
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
