| From: | "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, <pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: psqlODBC LGPL Licence |
| Date: | 2004-07-19 21:07:41 |
| Message-ID: | E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E407B390@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-odbc |
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Eisentraut [mailto:peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net]
Sent: Mon 7/19/2004 8:17 PM
To: Dave Page; pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [ODBC] psqlODBC LGPL Licence
> As long as you are describing the authorship, both should be listed, as
> is done in notice.txt.
Yeah, I'm not suggesting we remove them from the licence/credits etc, but rather the version resource for the Windows DLL. If you look at the list of drivers in the ODBC driver manager, it's that name you see as the supplier of the driver. It's been that long since they've been involved that I think it would be better to see PGDG there as the primary distributor.
Regards, Dave
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2004-07-19 21:15:08 | Re: 07.05.0001 Snapshot available |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2004-07-19 19:29:01 | Re: 07.05.0001 Snapshot available |