From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Jeff Davis <jdavis-pgsql(at)empires(dot)org> |
Cc: | Shachar Shemesh <psql(at)shemesh(dot)biz>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: License question |
Date: | 2004-04-23 02:44:21 |
Message-ID: | 14920.1082688261@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jeff Davis <jdavis-pgsql(at)empires(dot)org> writes:
> Also, can you license code at all if it isn't yours? I would assume you
> would have to make changes and license the changes you made, and
> distribute it along with the postgresql-licensed code.
You can't relicense code you don't own (if Shachar thinks differently
I suggest he talk to a lawyer). What you can do is choose a license for
*your modifications and additions* to that base code. When working with
BSD-tradition base code, there is hardly any restriction on what license
you use for your own work (at least, not from the BSD side --- see below).
When working with GPL or LGPL base code you are constrained to use the
same license as the base. You still own your own work, but you can't
redistribute the combined work unless you use the same license.
I don't think you could reasonably choose GPL as the license for your
mods/additions, since by my reading of the GPL it would forbid you from
redistributing a combined work that's not all GPL. But you could choose
LGPL, or any of the other standard free licenses.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Treat | 2004-04-23 03:05:22 | Re: contrib vs. gborg/pgfoundry for replication solutions |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-04-23 02:24:18 | Re: contrib vs. gborg/pgfoundry for replication solutions |