| From: | "Serguei Mokhov" <sa_mokho(at)alcor(dot)concordia(dot)ca> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Hannu Krosing" <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> |
| Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM>, "Massimo Dal Zotto" <dz(at)cs(dot)unitn(dot)it>, "PostgreSQL Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | [OT] Re: User locks code |
| Date: | 2001-08-24 16:07:04 |
| Message-ID: | 023601c12cb7$2095a580$5dd9fea9@gunn |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
----- Original Message -----
From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 10:42 AM
> > I really think that mixing licences inside one program is bad, if not
> > for
> > any other reason then for confusing people and making them have
> > discussions
> > like this.
>
> Yes, the weird part is that the BSD license is so lax (don't sue us)
> that it is the addition of the GPL that changes the affect of the
> license. If you added a BSD license to a GPL'ed piece of code, the
> effect would be near zero.
Sorry for asking this off-topic question, but I'm not sure I completely
understand this license issue... How GPL, LGPL, and BSD are conflicting
and or overlap, so that it causes such problems? AFAIK with the GPL
one has to ship the source code along with the product every time, but
under BSD it can be shipped without the source (that's why M$ doesn't attack
BSD as it does for GPL), and why the PostgreSQL project originally is being
released under the BSD-like license? Just curious...
Serguei
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-08-24 16:07:44 | Re: Toast, Text, blob bytea Huh? |
| Previous Message | Ross J. Reedstrom | 2001-08-24 16:06:56 | Re: User locks code |