Mozilla, License (again), PPG, GPGME

Ben Bucksch at
Sat Mar 9 18:46:01 CET 2002

Werner Koch wrote:

>Now that Mozilla is dual licensed there is no more problem to use it.
That Mozilla relicensing was intended for Mozilla being *used* in GPL 
apps like Galeon or Evolution, not for having GPL code included in Mozilla.

>If you want to use in addtion a proprietary plugin, you may not be
>able to do so.  In theory I can still change the GPGME license but I
>don't see a reason to endorse the use of proprietary software by doing
>that.  Mozilla is free and if someone wants a Flash plugin, he should
>write a compatible plugin or even better use a standard vector format.
I don't want to offend you, but you are free to write a Flash plugin 
that works with Mozilla. And a RealPlayer plugin, and a Quicktime one, 
and a Java engine with decent Swing support, and what-have-you. Never 
mind that you are probably not even allowed to, due to patents (arg!).

Believe me, I created Beonex Communicator, and I really try to keep 
everything completely Open-Source. But users want a browser that works, 
with Flash and all the other goodies, *now*. They don't want to be 
locked out of (stupid) sites like <>. While I much 
dislike having proprietary bits in a version of Beonex Communicator 
(there will always be a Open-Source-only version), I prefer that over 
people using MSIE6 on Windows XP or Netscape 6.

I also care about security, that's why PGP is important to Beonex.

Please don't make these goals incompatible. As I said, I choose a 
slightly less compatible Open-Source implementation over the "original" 
proprietary one, but what do I do until the latter exists? I can't write 
all of that myself.

To take a concrete example: A browser for the Bundestag. What, do you 
think, would be the options? If you were to offer one, what would you 
include in the browser? Surely, PGP would be desireable. Do you think 
that the Abgeordneten would accept not to be able to see Flash content?

Also, I don't think you "endorse" anything. You just *refrain* from 
*forcing* other people (like me) to do or not to do something (which 
would be a major problem).

And last but not least, your lib probably has 0 chance to be part of the 
base Mozilla, if it is not MPL/GPL/LGPL tripple-licensed. Any such 
plugin would surely live a third-party life, left bitrotting after a few 
months of frequent Mozilla changes.

> or even better use a standard vector format.
As much as I'd like to, I cannot change the content that is out there on 
the web.

Being locked out of a few major sites makes users already consider to 
switch the browser. You guess which one that is.

>What's wrong with enigmail?
I haven't looked at all at it, because its author basically says that 
it's just a little toy that he dumped on an ftp server, not really ready 
for use.

Have you audited it security-wise? I don't know enough about the 
problems there (exec() etc.) to do that.

>If you worry about performance problems
Not at all.

More information about the Gnupg-devel mailing list