sshd. "UseDNS no" ignored?

Chuck Swiger cswiger at
Fri Dec 1 09:19:10 PST 2006

On Dec 1, 2006, at 2:14 AM, Dmitry Pryanishnikov wrote:
> Hello!


> On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Chuck Swiger wrote:
>>> commercial.html
>>> contains both download URLs and "Non-commercial license agreement  
>>> for SSH Secure Shell for Servers" link.
>> Right, and the license restriction to non-commercial use only  
>> means that SSH Secure Shell is not OSI Open Source, because it  
>> violates OSD #6:
>    And I didn't say that it's the OSI Open Source. I wrote "(which  
> is also open-source)", not even "Open Source". So I didn't mean  
> that you can just copy&paste their sources into OpenSSH.  [ ... ]

I quoted what you said in my prior message; you need not remind me of  
your specific words.

Claiming to have an "open source" licensed codebase isn't of much  
value if that codebase cannot be used freely.  For example, if  
someone wrote some software, and put it under the BSD license, yet  
only released binaries without ever releasing the source code,  
claiming that the software is under an "open source" license may be  
technically true, but in practice is disingenuous and not especially  

I'd really prefer that people not claim a license is "open source"  
without submitting their license for consideration to the OSI board  
via the <license-discuss at> mailing list, and having it  
be approved.  While one may choose not to follow the process, doing  
so means that you are choosing not to work with people who are pretty  
good at evaluating licenses and making sure that those licenses are  
well-drafted, legally consistent, and support the goals of the open  
source community.


More information about the freebsd-stable mailing list