"Måns Rullgård" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Martin Koegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
The newer MySQL client libraries are GPL (with the FLOSS exception),
older versions were LGPL.
At http://dev.mysql.com/doc/internals/en/licensing-notice.html
MySQL has put a
Martin Koegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The newer MySQL client libraries are GPL (with the FLOSS exception),
> older versions were LGPL.
>
> At http://dev.mysql.com/doc/internals/en/licensing-notice.html
> MySQL has put a descrption of their network protocol, where they
> force programs using
On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 08:01:40PM +0200, Martin Koegler wrote:
> The newer MySQL client libraries are GPL (with the FLOSS exception),
> older versions were LGPL.
So, if you base your non GPL program on the older version, you are in
the clear.
Right? :)
Justin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMA
Scripsit Martin Koegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> At http://dev.mysql.com/doc/internals/en/licensing-notice.html
> MySQL has put a descrption of their network protocol, where they
> force programs using this protocol to be GPL:
>>The MySQL Protocol is proprietary.
>>
>>The MySQL Protocol is part of t
The newer MySQL client libraries are GPL (with the FLOSS exception),
older versions were LGPL.
At http://dev.mysql.com/doc/internals/en/licensing-notice.html
MySQL has put a descrption of their network protocol, where they
force programs using this protocol to be GPL:
>The MySQL Protocol is propr
On 10/7/05, Jon Dowland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A multi-licence wiki would be both detrimental from the perspective of
> using it (stuff from one page couldn't necessarily be moved into
> another, a dump of all the data would have to be divided up by-licence
> before use) but I think also un-m
Lewis Jardine wrote:
Ludovic Rousseau wrote:
It seams the only human possible solution is to ask RSA to change their
licence. I guess the Mozilla foundation could help if they care about
licencing issues.
Any idea of how we should contact Mozilla and RSA? I am really _not_ a
diplomatic guy :-)
Anyway, does
http://www.securecomputing.com/pdf/Statement_of_Assurance.pdf
solve the concerns?
On 10/11/05, Mahesh Pai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/11/05, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> > That's not what /usr/share/doc/libselinux/copyright says on my system.
Ludovic Rousseau wrote:
It seams the only human possible solution is to ask RSA to change their
licence. I guess the Mozilla foundation could help if they care about
licencing issues.
Any idea of how we should contact Mozilla and RSA? I am really _not_ a
diplomatic guy :-)
I'd expect Mozilla
On 10/11/05, Steve Langasek wrote:
> That's not what /usr/share/doc/libselinux/copyright says on my system.
1. You mean the ``in public domain'' part?
2. Is libselinux the package we are discussing?
>From http://www.nsa.gov/selinux/info/contrib.cfm
Secure Computing Corporation (SCC)
Secure Co
MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I thought the API reference was the PDF from
> http://www.rsasecurity.com/rsalabs/pkcs/pkcs-11/
> which has a slightly different licence and wouldn't be copied
> wholesale anyway, just the few names for interfacing.
I also checked the licence of the PDF file and
On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 03:32:57PM +0530, Mahesh Pai wrote:
> On 10/11/05, Lionel Elie Mamane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > See http://lwn.net/Articles/2376/ .
> > According to LWN (and other websites which have taken LWN as a
> > source), there may be a patent-time bomb affecting SELinux: Secure
On 10/11/05, Lionel Elie Mamane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> See http://lwn.net/Articles/2376/ .
>
> According to LWN (and other websites which have taken LWN as a
> source), there may be a patent-time bomb affecting SELinux: Secure
> Computing Corporation, who wrote a significant part of SELinux,
13 matches
Mail list logo
