Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)


From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: David Boreham <david_list(at)boreham(dot)org>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>,Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>,pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org,"Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc,Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>,Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>
Subject: Re: TODO: GNU TLS
Date: 2007-01-02 19:21:38
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
* David Boreham (david_list(at)boreham(dot)org) wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >I suspect most postgres developers and companies would like to keep 
> >things as BSDish as possible. 
> Right, hence OpenSSL would be the obvious best choice.
> In respect of licencing however, NSS is no 'worse' than GNU TLS
> because it may be distributed under the GPL and LGPL.

And the MPL, which at least according to the Mozilla FAQ falls somewhere
between the GPL and BSD (though I'm not sure I'd agree...).



In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: David BorehamDate: 2007-01-02 19:25:34
Subject: Re: TODO: GNU TLS
Previous:From: Stephen FrostDate: 2007-01-02 19:18:23
Subject: Re: TODO: GNU TLS

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group