Tom Lane wrote:
>"Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>>The page links to this: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html which
>>lists the BSD licence without the advertising clause as a GPL-compatible
>>free software license, of which it says: "This means you can combine a
>>module which was released under that license with a GPL-covered module to
>>make one larger program."
>You are misinterpreting the intent of that page completely.
>What the GNU people mean by "GPL compatible" is that you can combine
>GPL code with code licensed with a compatible license, and then
>redistribute the result UNDER THE GPL. (There are many licenses for
>which this is not so, and you basically couldn't redistribute such a
>combined work at all.) There is no situation in which they intend to
>let you redistribute combined works under the other license.
Ok, I accept this. Their wording is certainly unfortunate, especuially
when you combine it with what is said obn the redline home page.
Incidentally, there is a place that libedit is being maintained,
Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to build on mingw :-(
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Jan Wieck||Date: 2006-01-03 04:06:57|
|Subject: Re: Stats collector performance improvement|
|Previous:||From: Greg Stark||Date: 2006-01-02 23:52:08|
|Subject: Re: EINTR error in SunOS|