| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, Vince Vielhaber <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>, Brent Verner <brent(at)rcfile(dot)org>, mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, alavoor <alavoor(at)yahoo(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Licence: GNU/GPL |
| Date: | 2002-01-21 21:12:58 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.30.0201211608480.687-100000@peter.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian writes:
> > > Many PostgreSQL developers past and present are uncomfortable with
> > > restrictions imposed by the GPL. The PostgreSQL project always has
> > > and will continue to remain under the BSD license alone.
> >
> > This one is perfect ... Bruce? I really leaves no openings, no?
>
> It is hard to argue with this wording either. Let's see how people
> vote.
Besides the poor grammar in the second sentence, it's also incorrect,
because the whole point of the BSD license to some people is that it is
not "alone" under the BSD license but can be relicensed in other ways.
I think we should just scrap it and get on with our lives. There are
about 2 questions a year about the license issues, which does not qualify
it as "FAQ" anyway.
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephan Szabo | 2002-01-21 21:13:59 | Re: Foreign Key? |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-01-21 20:53:16 | Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Licence: GNU/GPL |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephan Szabo | 2002-01-21 21:13:59 | Re: Foreign Key? |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-01-21 20:53:16 | Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Licence: GNU/GPL |