Re: Misplaced modifier in Postgresql license

Robert Treat wrote:
> > > All of the arguments about license changes have been gone over in great
> > > detail in the archives (I think the last major go-round on the topic was
> > > in the summer of 2000). No one who has been around long enough to
> > > remember those flame wars is interested in re-opening the topic. Not
> > > even just to move a comma.
> >
> > What we could do is add a blurb on our web site or in the FAQ clarifying
> > this issue.
> >
>
> Oh, you mean like this paragraph
>
> "The above is the BSD license, the classic open-source license. It has
> no restrictions on how the source code may be used. We like it and have
> no intention of changing it."
>
> Which you added to the FAQ damn near two years ago !?!
>
> http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql-server/doc/FAQ.diff?r1=1.139&r2=1.140

Oh, that is in there. Good. Seems we don't need anything else on our
end. Someone can clearly point to that if they have concerns about our
wording being misinterpreted.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073