Re: psycopg2 license changed - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Federico Di Gregorio
Subject Re: psycopg2 license changed
Date
Msg-id 4B79B171.3050109@initd.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: psycopg2 license changed  (Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: psycopg2 license changed
Re: psycopg2 license changed
List pgsql-hackers
On 15/02/2010 20:12, Greg Smith wrote:
> Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
>> I just wanted all interested people know that psycopg2 2.0.14 to be
>> released in the next few days will be under the LGPL3 + OpenSSL
>> exception (example code and tests under the LGPL3 alone because they are
>> never linked to OpenSSL).
>
> Great news and I look forward to the release.  One small thing to
> consider:  having more than one license can turn into a cost to users of
> your software who are required to have each license reviewed for legal
> issues, and I'd think that maintaining two has some cost for you too.
> If it's possible for you to fold all these into a single license, that
> would really be a lot nicer.  Being able to say "psycopg2 is LGPL3 +
> OpenSSL exception", period, is much easier for people to deal with than
> having two licenses and needing to include the description you gave
> above for explanation.  Having to educate a lawyer on how linking works,
> so they understand the subtle distinction for why the two licenses
> exist, is no fun at all.

Even if tests and examples code aren't almost never distributed except
in the psycopg2 source package? A couple of other people contributed to
the tests: if you really feel like it is so important I'll contact them
and ask their permission to use the LGPL3 + exception (the contribution
was without the exception) or remove the code (we won't lose much.)

federico

--
Federico Di Gregorio                         federico.digregorio@dndg.it
Studio Associato Di Nunzio e Di Gregorio                  http://dndg.it                                  God is in the
rain...-- Evey Hammond 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Avoiding bad prepared-statement plans.
Next
From: Martijn van Oosterhout
Date:
Subject: Re: LISTEN/NOTIFY versus encoding conversion