Re: plPHP -- sort of an announcement.. but not commercial

From: Sean Chittenden <sean(at)chittenden(dot)org>
To: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
Cc: "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, Ron Johnson <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: plPHP -- sort of an announcement.. but not commercial
Date: 2003-08-04 19:57:55
Message-ID: 20030804195755.GD94710@perrin.int.nxad.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> >I'm pretty sure that's not right. I'm no an FSF/GNU expert, but
> >wasn't that the point of the LGPL? I don't think a BSDL bit of
> >code can link with a GPL bit of code without making the BSDL code
> >GPL'ed,
>
> That's just it -- PHP is not under GPL.

*nods* I was clarifying that a GPL lib can't be linked with a non-GPL
bit of code w/o the non-GPL code becoming GPL, even though it doesn't
apply in this case, unless Command Prompt licenses their plPHP under
the GPL.

--
Sean Chittenden

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message scott.marlowe 2003-08-04 20:03:45 Re: plPHP -- sort of an announcement.. but not commercial
Previous Message Manfred Koizar 2003-08-04 19:50:04 Re: Help with BEGIN/COMMIT within a transaction