| From: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, 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 15:40:36 |
| Message-ID: | 937d27e10910260840s1d28aab2o799f2c58d14dfb1e@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 3:36 PM, Jaime Casanova
<jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 8:08 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> ISTM we should apply to OSI for approval of our licence, so we can then
>> refer to it as the PostgreSQL licence.
>>
>
> IMHO and not being a lawyer, this is the only reason for anyone to
> think in change our license i think...
> even in the case both licenses are "roughly equivalent", because users
> are afraid of any changes. if we simply change our license for no good
> reason we will have a ton of questions about if PostgreSQL is being
> sold just as MySQL was...
Changing the licence is *not* going to happen.
--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
PGDay.EU 2009 Conference: http://2009.pgday.eu/start
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Smith | 2009-10-26 15:40:54 | Re: Parsing config files in a directory |
| Previous Message | Jaime Casanova | 2009-10-26 15:36:52 | Re: License clarification: BSD vs MIT |