-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Doug Quale wrote:
| Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org> writes:
|>The FSF characterizes the PostgreSQL license as being "an X11 style
|>license." They felt a need to distinguish between different
|>variations of licenses that are called 'BSD licenses.'
|>The FSF web site then compares various variations on "BSD licenses,"
|>considering that there are some that they deem to be "free" (in their
|>terms), and that there are others that they deem to _NOT_ be "free"
|>(again in their terms).
| No, that's not what the FSF says. All the BSD licenses are considered
| free by the FSF. (Look at the web page yourself.) Most BSD licenses
| are compatible with the GPL, but the original BSD license contains a
| problematic advertising clause that makes it incompatible with the
| The Postgres license is a free software license that is GPL
Where GPL compatible means (possibly among other things) that I can get
a BSD-licensed Postgresql and turn it into a GPL-licensed MyPostgresql ?
Not that I would, just curious. And even if I did, it would be a severly
castrated postgresql, as the history of the "My" particle suggests :))
~ - sorry I couldn't resist.
CSA, DBA, Developer
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
In response to
pgsql-admin by date
|Next:||From: Jaime Casanova||Date: 2004-03-26 18:31:08|
|Subject: Raw devices|
|Previous:||From: Andrew Sullivan||Date: 2004-03-26 15:07:18|
|Subject: Re: License for PostgreSQL for commercial purpose|