From: | "Dann Corbit" <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Oliver Elphick" <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk>, "Vivek Khera" <khera(at)kcilink(dot)com> |
Cc: | "PostgreSQL general list" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Humor me: Postgresql vs. MySql (esp. licensing) |
Date: | 2003-10-08 22:31:32 |
Message-ID: | D90A5A6C612A39408103E6ECDD77B8294CE1C9@voyager.corporate.connx.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Oliver Elphick [mailto:olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 3:10 PM
> To: Vivek Khera
> Cc: PostgreSQL general list
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Humor me: Postgresql vs. MySql (esp. licensing)
>
>
> On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 20:28, Vivek Khera wrote:
> > >>>>> "OE" == Oliver Elphick <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> >
> > OE> But as far as Debian is concerned, paragraph 1 applies:
> >
> > OE> 1. Free use for those who are 100% GPL
> >
> > [[ ... ]]
> >
> > OE> That makes it free under the Debian Free Software
> Guidelines, so I
> > OE> have no grounds for requesting its removal. :-(
> >
> > So if I build and sell an appliance (hardware+software) based on
> > debian and using the 'free' collection of software,
> suddenly I'm not
> > in compliance with their license. Sounds like a time-bomb
> waiting to
> > explode.
>
> It's licensed under the GPL, which means that you can indeed
> sell it, SO LONG AS you make your own source code available
> to your customer under the GPL or a compatible licence.
> Nothing in the GPL stops you demanding money for the
> software; what it requires is that you make your source code
> available.
Then who's going to pay for it?
> It's whole purpose is to force the freeing of
> source code; it is not much concerned with money. For
> example, I remember years ago installing a DG Aviion
> operating system upgrade, where I found that the compiler was
> gcc, with the GPL prominently attached. And every
> embedded-Linux device is in the same situation.
>
> MySQL's licence does not require you to buy a licence for
> _any_ commercial use, but only for commercial use where you
> do not release your source code under a GPL-compatible licence.
>
> There seems to be an awful lot of confusion about the GPL.
> Maybe Microsoft's campaign has been bearing fruit in unlikely
> quarters...
The reason that there is a lot of confusion is that the license
conditions are extremely confusing.
> --
> Oliver Elphick
> Oliver(dot)Elphick(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk
> Isle of Wight, UK
> http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
> GPG: 1024D/3E1D0C1C: CA12 09E0
> E8D5 8870 5839 932A 614D 4C34 3E1D 0C1C
> ========================================
> "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of
> God; for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither
> tempteth he any man; But every man is tempted, when he
> is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed."
> James 1:13,14
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index
> scan if your
> joining column's datatypes do not match
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | nolan | 2003-10-09 00:03:19 | Re: Humor me: Postgresql vs. MySql (esp. licensing) |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-10-08 22:30:18 | Re: ADD FOREIGN KEY (was Re: [GENERAL] 7.4Beta) |