On Thu, 2006-12-28 at 13:01 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Joshua D. Drake (jd@commandprompt.com) wrote:
> > What is the consideration here? I read the thread and it appears that
> > OpenSSL is not compatible with GPL? But we don't care about that right?
> > The OpenSSL looks pretty BSDish to me, expect the advertising clause (is
> > that what caused XFree86.org to fork?).
>
> OpenSSL isn't compatible with the GPL.
The original discussion stated that well placed attorneys in the market
feel that the FSF is trying to reach beyond the hands of god on this one
and that we don't need to worry about it (my words, for actual quote
read thread ;)).
> We do care because GPL
> applications link against libpq and therefore can end up linking against
> OpenSSL. \
Our concern is whether PostgreSQL is legally linked, not if something
else is. /me is trying to think very hard of a program that is GPL that
links to to PostgreSQL that would have a problem....
> I don't believe it was the OpenSSL advertising clause that
> caused the XFree86.org fork. My vaugue recollection is that XFree86
> changed their license to include something like an advertising clause
> and that's what cause the split.
That's what I meant, that Xfree86.org added an advertising clause which
caused the split.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
>
> Thanks,
>
> Stephen
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
