Re: LGPL

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org>, John Hansen <john(at)geeknet(dot)com(dot)au>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: LGPL
Date: 2005-06-15 13:26:20
Message-ID: 200506151326.j5FDQKv28206@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> >Maybe LGPL is OK, but I think we will try to avoid a dependency on LGPL
> >code if we can help it.
> >
> >
> >
>
> License issues aside, should we not be trying to avoid adding
> dependencies on third party libraries, especially those that are not
> standard on most operating systems? Also bear in mind that any required
> library would need to be supported on Windows as well as on *nix.

Yep, that's an issue too.

--
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

In response to

  • Re: LGPL at 2005-06-15 13:19:22 from Andrew Dunstan

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2005-06-15 14:04:22 Re: Autovacuum in the backend
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2005-06-15 13:19:22 Re: LGPL