| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Win32 native port |
| Date: | 2003-09-04 23:18:18 |
| Message-ID: | 3F57C83A.3040008@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dann Corbit wrote:
>You are making an assumption that the follwing sentence is only valid
>under conditions of the first. That is nowhere stated. That connection
>is only implied by your interpretation.
>
>
Not at all. the phrase "This means" clearly refers to what went before.
>Even a trivial and absurd lawsuit can have disastrous consequences.
>Consider SCO verses IBM.
>
>
>
Fine. You sit quaking with fear in your boots. I won't. BTW, according
to my legal theory *I* own all the code to Postgres. Bizarre? Sure, but
don't let that stop you worrying about it.
One more thing - there is a Cygwin port of Postgres that *is* linked
against Cygwin libraries - I haven't heard anybody suggesting that that
has infected us with GPLing the code.
Let's get real.
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nico King | 2003-09-04 23:24:06 | Question about Scripting in Postgresql. |
| Previous Message | Relaxin | 2003-09-04 23:10:10 | Re: PG7.5 |