Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
>> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> Robert Treat wrote:
>>>> On Monday 07 May 2007 15:52, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>>>> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>>>>> Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
<snip>
>>> Of course, the developer who owns the LGPL-licensed copyright is free to
>>> relicense his work under a different license, so if the ODBC developers
>>> want to contribute code to Postgres they can give their work under the
>>> Postgres license. (They must obtain permission from all the involved
>>> developers, obviously).
>> There are no original developers in the project now and I don't know
>> where or how they are now. I personally am not so eager to change the
>> license to BSD because it has been LGPL too long.
>
> Yes, that is a problem for releasing old code whose developers are long
> gone. (What I was thinking was copying *new* code from psqlodbc into
> Postgres).
What do you mean by *new* code?
New line?, word? or other kind of classification?
>> Oppositely I thought
>> we can implement the BSD licensed autoconf macros by ourselves but I'm
>> not sure how it can be considered as *not derived*.
>
> ISTM it would be necessary to get legal advice to be sure that it would
> be considered not derived, but one would think that that's too much
> hassle for something that can be done much more simply by including the
> differently-licensed files in the first place, which is legal anyway.
OK I understand.
Thanks.
regards,
Hiroshi Inoue
