Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL Licence: GNU/GPL

From: Matthew Kirkwood <matthew(at)hairy(dot)beasts(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Brent Verner <brent(at)rcfile(dot)org>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL Licence: GNU/GPL
Date: 2002-01-21 10:39:46
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.33.0201211021200.18772-100000@sphinx.mythic-beasts.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

On Mon, 21 Jan 2002, Tom Lane wrote:

> many PostgreSQL developers feel the GPL contains restrictions that
> would limit the ability of commercial entities to contribute or
> continue contributing to the codebase, and question the need for such

This could easily be interpreted as flamebait. It doesn't
limit contribution at all. What's wrong with:

The GPL contains restrictions which we do not
wish to impose upon our users and developers.

Why just "commercial entities"?

Matthew.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jordi 2002-01-21 10:42:12 Problem with character ' (single quote) in text fields
Previous Message Justin Clift 2002-01-21 10:39:05 Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Licence: GNU/GPL

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Brent Verner 2002-01-21 11:29:12 adding regression tests for PLs
Previous Message Luis Amigo 2002-01-21 10:39:11 how to force planner to do nestloops instead of merge joins