On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 1:06 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 08:53:07AM +0000, Dave Page wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:55 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 06:40:09PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> >> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Do we still have licensing issues if we ship Postgres and OpenSSL
>> >> > together?
>> >>
>> >> See
>> >> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20150801151410.GA28344%40awork2.anarazel.de
>> >
>> > True, but the current license is unchanged and has the advertising
>> > clause, which I think we have to honor if we ship OpenSSL:
>> >
>> > https://www.openssl.org/source/license.html
>> >
>> > I assume Windows has to ship OpenSSL with the installer and has to abide
>> > by this, for example. OSX might have to do the same. It might be good
>> > to see what we do for Windows packages.
>>
>> We already do it for all our installers - Windows, OSX and Linux. We
>> have to, otherwise we wouldn't be able to ensure the same binaries
>> would run on all the different supported versions.
>
> OK, good. So the Mac installers would have to do the same thing if they
> also start shipping OpenSSL too.
OSX == Mac.
--
Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
