On Tue, 2008-03-11 at 21:43 +0100, Robert Scheck wrote:
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008, Steve Grubb wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 March 2008 03:48:43 pm Robert Scheck wrote:
> > I've a third party application which depends on beecrypt, so I would claim
> > the ownership of this package at least on devel (maybe co-maintain on other
> > branches).
> I'd suggest they port to another library or package beecrypt into their
> application. We need to stop the proliferation of crypto and try to get it
> down to 1 or 2 libraries if at all possible.
I heard yourself clearly nominating porting a closed-source ERP system
running at Linux from beecrypt to yet another sucking crypto library... :)
Oh and above was just one example. There is even more software waiting for
you to got rewritten *g*
Well for FLOSS at least we could do it. But have you read
part of Steve's suggestion? That about packaging beecrypt into their
application? Of course Fedora will still contain more crypto libraries
than 1 or 2 for many future releases but what about other distros? I for
example don't see much probability in having beecrypt included in future
No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back.