Re: nss_ldap and openldap importing

From: David O'Brien <obrien_at_freebsd.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 15:48:54 -0700
On Thu, Jul 06, 2006 at 06:54:58PM -0700, Brooks Davis wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 06, 2006 at 10:49:27AM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
..snip..
> > > nss_ldap itself uses LGPL. As we use nss_ldap only as dynamic library,
> > > which is used in the "larger work" (which FreeBSD is), it can be also
> > > included into the source tree. So, we can import nss_ldap, by directly
> > > importing (with some specific changes, though) it and OpenLDAP into the
> > > source tree, can we? Just want to be sure that I understand licensing
> > > situation correctly.
> > 
> > My understanding is that we are generally trying to avoid importing any new
> > code that has any sort of GPL license. That would certainly be my (personal)
> > preference in any case.
> 
> Unless we have someone crediably committed to rewritting nss_ldap I
> think this is a good place to make an exception.  We can always remove
> it later if an implementation exists, but we could really use better
> integration with ldap.

Why can't this live in ports?  In none of my environments do I need LDAP
support.  I cannot imagine most of our users need LDAP support either.
Also, openldap-2.3.24 appears to be 19MB of files.  Just what are we
talking about importing?  I assume just the 3MB of the library directory?
 
-- 
-- David  (obrien_at_FreeBSD.org)
Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
A: Why is top-posting (putting a reply at the top of the message) frowned upon?
Received on Mon Jul 10 2006 - 20:49:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:58 UTC