Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?
Date
Msg-id 20060519161538.GF9919@surnet.cl
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?
List pgsql-hackers
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> >On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 02:58:11PM -0400, Mark Woodward wrote:
> >>The reality is that MySQL is widely supported by some very, shall we say,
> >>"interesting" open source projects and using these products with
> >>PostgreSQL would be a plus.
> >
> >The biggest headache I find with using postgres is that various GPL
> >licenced programs have trouble directly shipping postgresql support
> >because of our use of OpenSSL. Each and every one of those program
> >needs to add an exception to their licence for distributors to
> >distribute postgresql support.
> 
> Why would that be the case... OpenSSL and PostgreSQL both are BSD 
> licensed... Am I missing something?

Advertising clause.  PostgreSQL doesn't have it, OpenSSL does.

-- 
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] does wal archiving block the current client connection?