Re: separation of signed and encrypted messages

Florian Weimer <Florian.Weimer@RUS.Uni-Stuttgart.DE> Fri, 19 October 2001 11:10 UTC

To: ietf-openpgp@imc.org
Subject: Re: separation of signed and encrypted messages
References: <OE58s955E3yIyEOadke00001939@hotmail.com> <008201c15657$4b6f1880$dfc32609@transarc.ibm.com> <tg1yk2g084.fsf@mercury.rus.uni-stuttgart.de> <87itdezmgz.fsf@alberti.gnupg.de>
From: Florian Weimer <Florian.Weimer@RUS.Uni-Stuttgart.DE>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 12:52:30 +0200
In-Reply-To: <87itdezmgz.fsf@alberti.gnupg.de> (Werner Koch's message of "Wed, 17 Oct 2001 10:42:36 +0200")
Message-ID: <tgadyn9a1d.fsf@mercury.rus.uni-stuttgart.de>
Lines: 30
User-Agent: Gnus/5.090001 (Oort Gnus v0.01) Emacs/20.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-ietf-openpgp@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk

Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org> writes:

> On 17 Oct 2001 10:05:47 +0200, Florian Weimer said:
> 
> > (That's not Werner's fault, the FSF is not interested in contributions
> > from the University of Stuttgart in general.)
> 
> That is a bit too simplistic view.

It's the view most favorable for the FSF. ;-)

The contributions which had already been written were relatively minor
(a fraction of a man month, I think, at least if you exclude the
problem isolation phase and all the testing), so they weren't worth
the extra trouble an individual assignment contract would involve.  Of
course, this has stifled further development, but the FSF should not
be surprised by this.

> For reasons German lawyers - specialized on Free Software issues -
> can't agree with, that university does not want to sign such papers.

However, the FSF still has to tell the university the result of their
consultations. :-/

(We should take this to private mail, I think.)

-- 
Florian Weimer 	                  Florian.Weimer@RUS.Uni-Stuttgart.DE
University of Stuttgart           http://cert.uni-stuttgart.de/
RUS-CERT                          +49-711-685-5973/fax +49-711-685-5898

re: separation of signed and encrypted messages vedaal
Re: separation of signed and encrypted messages Michael Young
Re: separation of signed and encrypted messages Derek Atkins
Re: separation of signed and encrypted messages vedaal
Re: separation of signed and encrypted messages Michael Young
Re: separation of signed and encrypted messages vedaal
Re: separation of signed and encrypted messages Matthew Byng-Maddick
Re: separation of signed and encrypted messages Florian Weimer
Re: separation of signed and encrypted messages Werner Koch
Re: separation of signed and encrypted messages Florian Weimer