Re: [HACKERS] Missing headers Windows NT port
От | Michael Meskes |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Missing headers Windows NT port |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 19980914080627.A202@online-club.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Missing headers Windows NT port ("Thomas G. Lockhart" <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 01:55:31AM +0000, Thomas G. Lockhart wrote: > to ensure that there is a liability disclaimer for same. Would the > inclusion of a GPL addendum or GPL code be at odds with that, as long as > the UCB license continues to be included and prominently displayed? I Just an example. GPL allows to link against a non-GPLed library only if that library is part of the opertaing system. UCB license allows that. So if we were to add such a library we cannot do that if we have a small piece of GPLed code included. Or if you were to make a commercial release from PostgreSQL and in the process fix some bugs and add some more features, you can keep that stuff commercially, while under GPL you have to make the source available. That is you must not improve GPLed code without making these improvements GPL again. But then this discussion is worthless since we DO have GPLed code in PostgreSQL. Just check gram.c! If we do not want GPL we cannot use bison at all. Granted a commercial vendor could work around this by recompiling gram.c, preproc.c etc. After all the main function of GPL is to keep free software free, and I have no problems with that. Michael -- Michael Meskes meskes@online-club.de, meskes@debian.org Go SF49ers! Go Rhein Fire! Use Debian GNU/Linux!
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: