Re: contrib and licensing

From: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
To: mlw <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: contrib and licensing
Date: 2003-04-02 22:25:41
Message-ID: 20030402182416.O71125@hub.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, mlw wrote:

>
>
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
> >mlw <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> writes:
> >
> >
> >>I know nothing in contrib should be GPL, I have no problem with that.
> >>The question is the requirement of a GPL library to build a contrib project.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >>My SOAP/XML function will probably require my LGPL library as there is a
> >>lot of code I have written that I would need to implement it.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >If it won't work without your library then there's not much point in
> >putting it into contrib. Might as well just put it in your library
> >and distribute same as you have been doing.
> >
> >
> I'm a little put off by this attitude, are you saying there are no LGPL
> dependencies in PostgreSQL or /contrib?

In fact, yes ... or, at least, if there are any left in /contrib, its only
because we haven't moved them to gborg yet ...

> If that is a real objective, I'm surprised.

The base source tree has always been as BSD pure as we can make it ... its
never been kept a secret ...

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message mlw 2003-04-02 22:32:10 Re: PostgreSQL and SOAP, suggestions?
Previous Message scott.marlowe 2003-04-02 22:22:05 Re: contrib and licensing