cvs commit: src Makefile.inc1 src/crypto/openssh sshd.c src/etc Makefile src/etc/gss Makefile mech qop src/etc/mtree BSD.include.dist BSD.root.dist src/gnu/usr.bin/cvs/cvs Makefile src/include Makefile gssapi.h src/include/gssapi Makefile gssapi.h ...

[Hiroki Sato]

Hi,

Doug Rabson <dfr at FreeBSD.org> wrote
  in <200512291440.jBTEeMt7052684 at repoman.freebsd.org>:

df> dfr         2005-12-29 14:40:22 UTC
df>
df>   FreeBSD src repository
df>
df>   Modified files:
df>     .                    Makefile.inc1
df>     crypto/openssh       sshd.c
df>     etc                  Makefile
df>     etc/mtree            BSD.include.dist BSD.root.dist
df>     gnu/usr.bin/cvs/cvs  Makefile
df>     include              Makefile
df>     kerberos5/lib/libgssapi Makefile
(snip)
df>   Log:
df>   Add a new extensible GSS-API layer which can support GSS-API plugins,
df>   similar the the Solaris implementation. Repackage the krb5 GSS mechanism
df>   as a plugin library for the new implementation. This also includes a
df>   comprehensive set of manpages for the GSS-API functions with text mostly
df>   taken from the RFC.

 Are these RFC derived manual pages legally safe?  Recently we replaced
 our IPv6 related manual pages from KAME project because most of them reuse
 RFC text as manual pages and IETF rights in contribution (RFC 3978) does
 not permit to produce a derivative work except for IETF or ISOC.  So,
 I think we have a consensus that the RFC license is incompatible with
 the BSD license.

--
| Hiroki SATO
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-src/attachments/20060102/b147abcc/attachment.bin