Re: LGPL

Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us] Wrote:
> "John Hansen" <john(at)geeknet(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> > Is there any reason why we would not be able to use LGPL code in PG?
>
> Another point of view on this: it's OK to use LGPL code if
> it's available on the local platform, so long as we don't
> *require* it to be present. It's even safer if the LGPL code
> is merely one implementation of an API that has other
> implementations under different licenses.
> For instance I have no fear at all of linking to glibc, and
> little of linking to libreadline (the latter because we can
> also use the BSD libedit).
>
> If we could not build without libreadline then we would have
> a very big problem. And we certainly aren't going to
> textually incorporate any new LGPL (or GPL) code into our
> distribution.

Right,... Let me be more specific then,....

What are your thoughts on using the glib
(http://developer.gnome.org/doc/API/2.2/glib/index.html) library for
some functionality in pg?

Additionally,. I came across this fine library
(http://home.gna.org/uri/uri.en.html) which I'd like to use as a base
for a new URI type, unfortunately it's GPL, so based on the above I'm
guessing using it as is, is out of the question?

>
> regards, tom lane
>
>