| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tyler MacDonald <tyler(at)yi(dot)org> |
| Cc: | lmyho <lm_yho(at)yahoo(dot)com>, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Debian package for freeradius_postgresql module |
| Date: | 2006-04-07 21:44:37 |
| Message-ID: | 16944.1144446277@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Tyler MacDonald <tyler(at)yi(dot)org> writes:
> OK, I'm kind of confused about how the legal red tape works here.
> Debian packages all sorts of GPL code, and both openssl and postgres are
> released under more liberal licenses. About the only legal issue I could see
> is the legalities surrounding the export of openssl, but I thought debian
> had already found it's own way around that.
[ looks in openssl tarball... ] It looks like the openssl license is
essentially old-style BSD (ie, with advertising clause). If Debian is
being anal about refusing to ship old-BSD code linked to GPL code,
there's going to be a whole lot of stuff that doesn't support SSL on
Debian, not only Postgres. Or are they selectively enforcing this
policy against PG?
(FWIW, Red Hat doesn't seem to be worried about this ... you could
always migrate to Fedora ;-))
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Douglas McNaught | 2006-04-07 22:06:03 | Re: Debian package for freeradius_postgresql module |
| Previous Message | Bjørn T Johansen | 2006-04-07 21:32:45 | Creating a trigger on n tables? |