From: Joseph Block <jpb@gate.net>
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 94 07:34:04 PDT
To: Richard.Johnson@Colorado.EDU
Subject: Re: PGP 2.6 legal_kludge
In-Reply-To: <199407040738.BAA12513@spot.Colorado.EDU>
Message-ID: <199407041437.KAA102769@inca.gate.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text


Re:
> > Also, concerning the PGP 2.3a/2.6/2.6ui controversy, is the only "problem"
> > with 2.6 the fact that after 9/1/94 it will start reporting an incompatible
> > version number that will make its output unreadable by older versions?  If
> > so, and if source code is available, why couldn't the date checking routine
> > be located in the source code and simply commented out, then the whole
> > thing recompiled?

So what stops someone from patching 2.3?  Since 2.3 is already allegedly in
violation, why not just make it compatible with 2.6?

jpb@gate.net