From: | teg(at)redhat(dot)com (Trond Eivind =?iso-8859-1?q?Glomsr=d8d?=) |
---|---|
To: | Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: beta testing version |
Date: | 2000-12-05 23:43:44 |
Message-ID: | xuy66kyzb67.fsf@halden.devel.redhat.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> writes:
> Mitch Vincent wrote:
> >
> > Regardless of what license is best, could the license even be changed now? I
> > mean, some of the initial Berkeley code is still in there in some sense and
> > I would think that the original license (BSD I assume) of the initial source
> > code release would have to be somehow honored.. I'm just wondering if the PG
> > team could change the license even if they wanted to.. I should go read the
> > license again, I know the answer to the above is in there but it's been a
>
> _Every_single_ copyright holder of code in the core server would have to
> agree to any change.
No - GPL projects can include BSD-copyrighted code, no problem
there. That being said, creating bad blood is not a good thing, so an
approach like this would hurt PostgreSQL a lot.
--
Trond Eivind Glomsrød
Red Hat, Inc.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2000-12-06 00:25:22 | Re: beta testing version (not really anymore ;) |
Previous Message | Lamar Owen | 2000-12-05 23:27:37 | Re: beta testing version |