On Tue, 24 Feb 1998, Henry Spencer wrote:
> > I'm sorry, but what exactly is the problem with GPL?
>
> I can't speak for the PostgreSQL folks, who may have their own reasons,
> but my take on it is simple: it creates complex legal obligations which
> limit use of the software by their very existence.
Exactly!
> The GPL is a tool for people with an axe to grind. If all you want to do
> is distribute software for free, a simpler licence (or even just placing
> the software in the public domain) is preferable.
I believe, one thing further, that since we started off under the
Berkeley license, we can't change anyway (not that I would consider it
*looks around*):
/*
* Copyright (c) 1990, 1993
* The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved.
*
* Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
* modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
* are met:
* 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
* notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
* 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
* notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
* documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
* 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this
software
* must display the following acknowledgement:
* This product includes software developed by the University of
* California, Berkeley and its contributors.
