Re: License clarification: BSD vs MIT

From: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: License clarification: BSD vs MIT
Date: 2009-10-26 13:51:27
Message-ID: 937d27e10910260651w297b1ecfhb386d5b7962931bf@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-10-26 at 13:13 +0000, Dave Page wrote:
>
>> > ISTM we should apply to OSI for approval of our licence, so we can then
>> > refer to it as the PostgreSQL licence. That then avoids any situation
>> > that might allow someone to claim some injunctive relief of part of the
>> > licence because of it being widely misdescribed.
>>
>> Already in hand.
>
> OK, nose retracted.

:-)

--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
PGDay.EU 2009 Conference: http://2009.pgday.eu/start

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2009-10-26 14:06:39 Re: Parsing config files in a directory
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2009-10-26 13:51:14 Re: Parsing config files in a directory