openssl vs. libressl

[woods.w at gmail.com]

I agree, but “better license” has nothing to do with that, does it ? My point is we should look at the best technical solution, and THAT should be the only factor. Anything else is ancillary.

> On Nov 11, 2015, at 10:54 AM, Brandon Allbery <allbery.b at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 11:52 AM, <woods.w at gmail.com <mailto:woods.w at gmail.com>> wrote:
> I don’t believe a “better license” should be the dictating factor, I believe what should dictate what is included is what has better functionality. This is politics, and TBH is not a technical reason for inclusion or exclusion. TBH, I believe the only dictating factor should be technical, what does the job best, period. Everything else is ancillary. Something could have a much better license and be total crap.
> 
> For many people, being able to get binary archives instead of always having to build from source is rather more than just "politics".
> 
> -- 
> brandon s allbery kf8nh                               sine nomine associates
> allbery.b at gmail.com <mailto:allbery.b at gmail.com>                                  ballbery at sinenomine.net <mailto:ballbery at sinenomine.net>
> unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad        http://sinenomine.net <http://sinenomine.net/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-users/attachments/20151111/a6df70f9/attachment.html>