From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu, xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net |
Subject: | Re: psql & readline & win32 |
Date: | 2006-01-02 23:52:13 |
Message-ID: | 43B9BCAD.6090905@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
>"Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>
>
>>The page links to this: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html which
>>lists the BSD licence without the advertising clause as a GPL-compatible
>>free software license, of which it says: "This means you can combine a
>>module which was released under that license with a GPL-covered module to
>>make one larger program."
>>
>>
>
>You are misinterpreting the intent of that page completely.
>
>What the GNU people mean by "GPL compatible" is that you can combine
>GPL code with code licensed with a compatible license, and then
>redistribute the result UNDER THE GPL. (There are many licenses for
>which this is not so, and you basically couldn't redistribute such a
>combined work at all.) There is no situation in which they intend to
>let you redistribute combined works under the other license.
>
>
>
>
Ok, I accept this. Their wording is certainly unfortunate, especuially
when you combine it with what is said obn the redline home page.
Incidentally, there is a place that libedit is being maintained,
apparently: http://www.thrysoee.dk/editline/
Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to build on mingw :-(
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jan Wieck | 2006-01-03 04:06:57 | Re: Stats collector performance improvement |
Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2006-01-02 23:52:08 | Re: EINTR error in SunOS |