Werner Koch wk at
Tue Dec 10 11:15:35 CET 2013

On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 08:58, nmav at said:

> Well, I really want to think that it is also about collaboration.

Right, I thought about the same lines but back then Niels decided to
compile his own library without the need to comply to the strict GNU
rules.  Thus he was able to use all kind of code while I was not.  A
decade or more ago I had to reject Brian Gladman's offer to use his code
due simply due to the CA requirement.  Latter then the GNU project seems
to have concluded that CAs are not important anymore unless they are
already in use.  The effect was that GNUTLS silently started to use
Nettle instead of helping to convince the GNU towers to drop the CA
requirement for Libgcrypt.

Meanwhile I terminated by own CAs and we are now able to basically do
the same what Nettle did.  There are lots of crypto libraries out there
and anyone may use whatever he likes.  In case there is useful code in
Nettle we may included that in Libgcrypt but I see no point in joining
the two libraries.

> While I understand that everyone has a different agenda on the things
> that need to be done, schedules etc., a compromise that will benefit
> everyone may be possible.

Well, you removed all support for Libgcrypt from GNUTLS.  If you want to
use it again, you only need to add that layer again.



Die Gedanken sind frei.  Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.

More information about the Gcrypt-devel mailing list