It's not a perfect match to MIT, but it is close. We (-core) are already actively working on this issue to find the most appropriate way forward.
On 10/25/09, Devrim GÜNDÜZ <dev...@gunduz.org> wrote: > > Background info: Fedora/Red Hat folks (not Tom...) changed license in > PostgreSQL spec file from BSD to MIT with the following notice: > > # PG considers their license to be simplified BSD, but it's more nearly > MIT > > Our license wording fits perfectly to MIT, if I'm not wrong. However, we > always advertise ourselves as using BSD license. > > Personally I don't think it is a big issue, but eventually I'd like to > clarify our license in our website. > > ...so that I and Tom will use same License tags ;) > > Regards, > -- > Devrim GÜNDÜZ, RHCE > Command Prompt - http://www.CommandPrompt.com > devrim~gunduz.org, devrim~PostgreSQL.org, devrim.gunduz~linux.org.tr > http://www.gunduz.org Twitter: http://twitter.com/devrimgunduz > -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com PGDay.EU 2009 Conference: http://2009.pgday.eu/start -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
