From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
Cc: | mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: TODO: GNU TLS |
Date: | 2006-12-29 05:08:37 |
Message-ID: | 28346.1167368917@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> So, Debian is distributing an application (exim4 w/ libpq & libssl)
> which includes GPL code (exim4) combined with code under another license
> (BSD w/ advertising clause) which *adds additional restrictions* (the
> advertising clause) over those in the GPL, which is against the terms of
> the GPL.
Stephen, let me explain *exactly* why I think this is horsepucky.
libjpeg, my other major open-source project, has always been shipped
under a BSD-ish license that includes an "advertising" clause; I quote:
: (2) If only executable code is distributed, then the accompanying
: documentation must state that "this software is based in part on the work of
: the Independent JPEG Group".
Curiously, every single GPL-license web browser in the world uses
libjpeg. Until I see a widespread willingness to remove JPEG support in
GPL-licensed software, and/or somebody providing a pure-GPL replacement
for libjpeg, I am not going to take this argument seriously. There is
exactly zero meaningful difference between the libjpeg license terms and
the OpenSSL terms, but where is the pushback on libjpeg? I have not
seen any, in all the years I worked on that project.
(At one point RMS did make a half-hearted attempt to get me to relicense
libjpeg as GPL, but I have never seen any indication whatsoever that
anyone else cared.)
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-12-29 05:20:47 | Re: [BUGS] BUG #2846: inconsistent and confusing |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-12-29 04:39:37 | Re: TODO: Add a GUC to control whether BEGIN inside |