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:
Maybe it's BSD which is different from the license of psqlodbc (LGPL).
Is there no problem with their coexistence ?
Or is it
Tom Lane wrote:
Hiroshi Inoue [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Robert Treat wrote:
It's generally a very bad idea for a BSD licensed project to include lgpl
licensed code
Psqlodbc package is LGPL licensed and seems to have little problem to
include copy of BSD licensed code as a part of it.
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
On Monday 07 May 2007 15:52, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
Maybe it's BSD which is different from the license of psqlodbc (LGPL).
Is there no problem with their coexistence ?
Or is it possible for psqlodbc to be LGPL entirely ?
I am having
Robert Treat wrote:
On Monday 07 May 2007 15:52, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
Maybe it's BSD which is different from the license of psqlodbc (LGPL).
Is there no problem with their coexistence ?
Or is it possible for psqlodbc to be LGPL entirely ?
Robert Treat wrote:
On Monday 07 May 2007 15:52, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
Maybe it's BSD which is different from the license of psqlodbc (LGPL).
Is there no problem with their coexistence ?
Or is it possible for psqlodbc to be LGPL entirely ?
I am
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Robert Treat wrote:
On Monday 07 May 2007 15:52, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
Maybe it's BSD which is different from the license of psqlodbc (LGPL).
Is there no problem with their coexistence ?
Or is it possible for psqlodbc to be
Hiroshi Inoue [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Robert Treat wrote:
It's generally a very bad idea for a BSD licensed project to include lgpl
licensed code
Psqlodbc package is LGPL licensed and seems to have little problem to
include copy of BSD licensed code as a part of it.
Right, that direction
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Am Dienstag, 8. Mai 2007 01:45 schrieb Hiroshi Inoue:
Must I mail them directly to you in the first place ?
Yes.
Oh I seem to have been apart from the community too long.
Could you please tell me where I can find the rule ?
regards,
HIroshi Inoue
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Am Dienstag, 8. Mai 2007 15:12 schrieb Hiroshi Inoue:
Oh I seem to have been apart from the community too long.
Could you please tell me where I can find the rule ?
The only rule there is is that if you want to talk to person X, you write
to
person X. That rule
I've not seen your reply yet.
Do you have a mind to cooperate with us ?
I wrote:
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
User Petere wrote:
Log Message:
---
Put Autotools-generated files into subdirectory config/; add macro
files used from PostgreSQL
Maybe it's BSD which is different from the license of psqlodbc (LGPL).
Is there no problem with their coexistence ?
Or is it possible for psqlodbc to be LGPL entirely ?
Thanks a lot.
Hiroshi Inoue
Jim Nasby wrote:
On May 6, 2007, at 4:38 PM, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
Under what license is this
Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
Maybe it's BSD which is different from the license of psqlodbc (LGPL).
Is there no problem with their coexistence ?
Or is it possible for psqlodbc to be LGPL entirely ?
I am having difficulty in understanding what the problem is. My
understanding is that using BSD
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
Maybe it's BSD which is different from the license of psqlodbc (LGPL).
Is there no problem with their coexistence ?
Or is it possible for psqlodbc to be LGPL entirely ?
I am having difficulty in understanding what the problem is. My
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
I've not seen your reply yet.
You keep sending your emails to randomly invented addresses, so I don't
get them.
Must I mail them directly to you in the first place ?
I'm sending the emails to pgsql-committes and pgsql-hackers also.
Please note
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
Maybe it's BSD which is different from the license of psqlodbc (LGPL).
Is there no problem with their coexistence ?
Or is it possible for psqlodbc to be LGPL entirely ?
I am having difficulty in understanding what the problem is. My
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
Maybe it's BSD which is different from the license of psqlodbc (LGPL).
Is there no problem with their coexistence ?
Or is it possible for psqlodbc to be LGPL entirely ?
I am
Hiroshi Inoue [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Could someone confirm the following my recognition ?
The LPGL package could add and release a copy of some Postgres BSD
licensed code as LGPL ones together with the current LGPL code and
then the package is still entirely LGPL.
No, the files you
Tom Lane wrote:
Hiroshi Inoue [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Could someone confirm the following my recognition ?
The LPGL package could add and release a copy of some Postgres BSD
licensed code as LGPL ones together with the current LGPL code and
then the package is still entirely LGPL.
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
User Petere wrote:
Log Message:
---
Put Autotools-generated files into subdirectory config/; add macro
files used from PostgreSQL there so you don't need a PostgreSQL
source tree to bootstrap the code.
snip
Added
20 matches
Mail list logo
