Re: PostgreSQL, LGPL and GPL.

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: "Karen Hill" <karen_hill22(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL, LGPL and GPL.
Date: 2006-10-20 19:45:00
Message-ID: 200610202145.02010.peter_e@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Karen Hill wrote:
> If you make create a PostgreSQL database that uses PostGIS and you
> distribute that database, than your database (tables, stored
> procedures, views, etc) are GPL?

Nothing ever becomes GPL automatically. You may wish to distribute your
own work under the GPL, but you don't have to.

> Like wise if you create a client
> that connects to that database, do they also become GPL?

Likewise.

> Does
> PostgreSQL in effect become GPL when using PostGIS because PostGIS
> accesses parts of PostgreSQL?

Likewise.

> Npgsql is LGPL. It means you must release the source of Npgsql when
> distributing it, and if you modify Npgsql, but not have to release
> the source under the (L)GPL of the software that calls Npgsql
> functions?

Correct.

> If you provide the source on a CD and the (GPL/LGPL) license as a
> text file on that CD if you distribute, then are your obligations met
> under the GPL/LGPL?

That depends on the distribution methods of the non-source.

> What if those you distribute to lose the source
> code CD, can they then come after you X number of years later
> demanding the source?

No.

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2006-10-20 19:48:53 Re: PostgreSQL, LGPL and GPL.
Previous Message Karen Hill 2006-10-20 19:43:36 Re: PostgreSQL, LGPL and GPL.