On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, mlw wrote: > > > > > > > Tom Lane wrote: > > > > >mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > > >>I know nothing in contrib should be GPL, I have no problem with that. > > >>The question is the requirement of a GPL library to build a contrib project. > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >>My SOAP/XML function will probably require my LGPL library as there is a > > >>lot of code I have written that I would need to implement it. > > >> > > >> > > > > > >If it won't work without your library then there's not much point in > > >putting it into contrib. Might as well just put it in your library > > >and distribute same as you have been doing. > > > > > > > > I'm a little put off by this attitude, are you saying there are no LGPL > > dependencies in PostgreSQL or /contrib? > > In fact, yes ... or, at least, if there are any left in /contrib, its only > because we haven't moved them to gborg yet ...
a program in /contrib linking to an LGPL lib has never been an issue. Linking to LGPL libs doesn't encumber the software linking to it. > > If that is a real objective, I'm surprised. > > The base source tree has always been as BSD pure as we can make it ... its > never been kept a secret ... True. But not linking to LGPLd libs would be a bit extreme there. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html