Re: License clarification: BSD vs MIT

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: License clarification: BSD vs MIT
Date: 2009-10-26 13:47:41
Message-ID: 1256564861.8450.11197.camel@ebony
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, 2009-10-26 at 13:13 +0000, Dave Page wrote:

> > ISTM we should apply to OSI for approval of our licence, so we can then
> > refer to it as the PostgreSQL licence. That then avoids any situation
> > that might allow someone to claim some injunctive relief of part of the
> > licence because of it being widely misdescribed.
>
> Already in hand.

OK, nose retracted.

--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Merlin Moncure 2009-10-26 13:48:03 Re: Proposal: String key space for advisory locks
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2009-10-26 13:46:31 Re: Scaling up deferred unique checks and the after trigger queue