David Garamond <lists(at)zara(dot)6(dot)isreserved(dot)com> writes:
> I was not saying that _FSF_ lists PG on that page. I was saying that
> _the PG website_ states PG license as "BSD", without using the
> additional attribute "modern" or "modified". People who read the FSF
> license page might think PG BSD license is not the modern/modified one.
Actually, the FSF page doesn't seem to refer to the BSD license per se;
they always talk about either "original BSD" or "modified BSD", and they
are perfectly clear that the advertising clause is the difference.
I don't think anyone would be likely to get confused, or to be unable to
figure out that PG's license doesn't have the advertising clause.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-general by date
|Next:||From: Terry Lee Tucker||Date: 2004-03-27 22:09:37|
|Subject: Re: Passing a row|
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2004-03-27 19:43:08|
|Subject: Re: win32 users list (Re: Native Win32 port - PLEASE!)|