On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 12:49 AM, Niels Möller nisse@lysator.liu.se wrote:
Andres Mejia mcitadel@gmail.com writes:
So here are some questions I have. GNU Nettle is going to stick with LGPL-2.1+ correct?
At some point the license may be upgraded to LGPLv3. Or dual license LGPLv3 and GPLv2+. The latter, more complex, alternative would be helpful for you, right?
So long as XBMC can remain GPLv2, then it's ok.
However, I'm sure there are some projects out there that could benefit from an LGPLv2.1 crypto library. I looked around and so far have found one, libaacs which is itself LGPLv2.1. libaacs is used indirectly by XBMC, through libbluray. Currently, libaacs uses libgcrypt for crypto, but it would be nice if the number of crypto libraries in use are kept to a minimum.
Another question, the only thing I see missing in nettle that libarchive can make use of is RIPEMD-160. In case I want to submit patches, I should submit them here correct?
Right.
Also, I suppose if I wanted to submit patches, there's no issue in porting code from gcrypt over to nettle correct?
Copying code from libgcrypt is fine. In general, to make it as easy as possible to integrate patches, it's nice if they include:
An authoritative reference for the implemented algorithm.
Test cases.
Documentation.
And then both interface and implementation should try to follow
nettle conventions.
Regards, /Niels
-- Niels Möller. PGP-encrypted email is preferred. Keyid C0B98E26. Internet email is subject to wholesale government surveillance.