Re: [admin] Request for project hosting: clc - Common Lisp Cryptography
On Thu, 20 May 2004, [iso-8859-15] Tåle Skogan wrote:
Thanks, I wasn't aware of Common-Lisp-Controller. Do you think it would help to use CLC (uppercase) as project name (including documentation and web pages), and clc (lower case) in the code (package name, function names, file and directory names).
Probably not very much, given that CLiki page names are case-insenitive and CL uppercases by default.
I was hoping to avoid using the long name (Common Lisp Cryptography or derivatives thereof) except in the definition of the acronym. On the other hand, if both CLC and clc are well established acronyms in the Lisp world, I don't won't to intrude on them. I would appreciate further advice on the naming issue.
Minor brainstorm: - cl-crypto / common-lisp-cryptography - lc / lisp-cryptography - various "less-canonical-style" names such as clypto, cryptcl, cryptomania, etc... Cheers, -- Nikodemus
Ho hum. I just realized that I don't think none of us is 100% up-to-date on the US export laws related to cryptography (this is relevant as our server is hosted in the US). Quick look-and-see around the net, and particularly Debian site makes it seem that these days it's crypto exports are allowed, but require a dead-tree notification to NSA and an email to notification to BXA ("Commerce Department's Bureau of Export Administration"). See: http://www.debian.org/legal/cryptoinmain Unless someone particularly feels like dealing with this I propose we set up a non-us server for software that may fall under such laws. Iirc waays-back someone (Henrik Motakef?) offered diskspace and bandwidth from a box located in Germany -- either that or I could finally take up on my word and get us another virtual server from Finland. (Of course, anyone following this is free the pipe in and offer hosting if the have space and bandwitdt on a non-us box.) Thoughts and opinions? Cheers, -- Nikodemus Siivola PS. Tåle, sorry for the delay this may cause. We originally talked about this when setting up Common-lisp.net, but the actuality hasn't arisen until now. You sort of caught us with our pants down. ;-)
Nikodemus Siivola <tsiivola@cc.hut.fi> writes:
[...] Unless someone particularly feels like dealing with this I propose we set up a non-us server for software that may fall under such laws.
That last option seems to me to be the best one. Safe and hassle free. Regards, Mario.
participants (2)
-
Mario Mommer -
Nikodemus Siivola