Re: License question

From: Jeff Davis <jdavis-pgsql(at)empires(dot)org>
To: Shachar Shemesh <psql(at)shemesh(dot)biz>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: License question
Date: 2004-04-23 00:34:49
Message-ID: 1082680489.32307.1077.camel@jeff
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> I still think you should change the text on the front page to read, at
> the very least, "PostgreSQL is distributed under a flexible X11 like
> license". "BSD" is too misleading, and most people know the X11 license
> by now.
>

http://www.freebsd.org/copyright/freebsd-license.html

http://www.postgresql.org/licence.html

They look very similar to me. What's the difference?

Also, I'm a little confused. If you mix some postgresql-licensed code
with some (for example) gpl-licensed code, is the end result:
(a) GPL, since that's the more restrictive of the two; or
(b) The gpl code is still gpl, and the postgresql code is still
postgresql-licensed?

"b" makes more sense to me, since I don't see how you can "relicense"
the code if it's not yours.

Also, can you license code at all if it isn't yours? I would assume you
would have to make changes and license the changes you made, and
distribute it along with the postgresql-licensed code.

Regards,
Jeff Davis

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rod Taylor 2004-04-23 01:00:22 Re: contrib vs. gborg/pgfoundry for replication solutions
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2004-04-23 00:28:31 Re: contrib vs. gborg/pgfoundry for replication solutions