Re: contrib and licensing
От | Stephan Szabo |
---|---|
Тема | Re: contrib and licensing |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20030402185333.X70275-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: contrib and licensing (Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: contrib and licensing
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Lamar Owen wrote: > On Wednesday 02 April 2003 18:11, Dann Corbit wrote: > [snip] > > > True. But not linking to LGPLd libs would be a bit extreme there. > > > I disagree. Because of the language in the LGPL: > > http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/lesser.txt > > > > I would not use LGPL tools in any finished commercial project. For me, > > if PostgreSQL linked against LGPL libraries, it would kill its > > usefulness for me completely. > > > "However, linking a "work that uses the Library" with the Library > > creates an executable that is a derivative of the Library (because it > > contains portions of the Library), rather than a "work that uses the > > library". The executable is therefore covered by this License. > > Section 6 states terms for distribution of such executables." > > <stifles ROTFL> > > Everyone does realize that on Linux PostgreSQL binaries link against glibc, > which is LGPL...... I assume the standard dynamic linker counts as "a suitable shared library mechanism for linking with the Library" as per LGPL 6b. ;)
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: