Re: PostgreSQL licence

From: Thom Brown <thombrown(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>
Cc: PGSQL Mailing List <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL licence
Date: 2010-02-02 14:12:28
Message-ID: bddc86151002020612q7a9ffd51tc4c7eb2c97df41af@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

2010/2/2 Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>

> On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 13:09 +0000, Thom Brown wrote:
> >
> > Could someone clarify, is this guy indeed correct and the licence page
> > needs updating stating it's something similar to an MIT licence, or is
> > he just plain wrong? As it stands, the Wikipedia page on PostgreSQL
> > says "similar to the MIT License".
>
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/1256509037.7432.10.camel@hp-laptop2.gunduz.org
>
>
>
I take it you're staying the licence page needs updating? Maybe some
licence clarification should coincide with v9?

Thom

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Vincenzo Romano 2010-02-02 14:22:41 Re: PostgreSQL licence
Previous Message Aaron 2010-02-02 13:51:42 Connect RDF to PostgreSQL?