Am Samstag, 29. Januar 2005 23:32 schrieb Marc G. Fournier:
> On Wed, 26 Jan 2005, Christopher Browne wrote:
> > Actually, the latter isn't so.
> >
> > If Mammoth or Pervasive or such release their own release of
> > PostgreSQL, nothing has historically mandated that they make that
> > release avai
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Jan 2005, Christopher Browne wrote:
>
> >Actually, the latter isn't so.
> >
> >If Mammoth or Pervasive or such release their own release of
> >PostgreSQL, nothing has historically mandated that they make that
> >release available under the BSD license.
> >
> >
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005, Christopher Browne wrote:
Actually, the latter isn't so.
If Mammoth or Pervasive or such release their own release of
PostgreSQL, nothing has historically mandated that they make that
release available under the BSD license.
Presumably acceptance of the patent would change that
Oops! [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tommi Maekitalo) was seen spray-painting on a wall:
> Hi,
>
> I just read about this IBM-patent-issue at www.heise.de. IBM grants
> this patens to all projects, which follow one of the licenses, which
> are approved by the open-source-initiative. And the BSD-license is
> as
Hi,
I just read about this IBM-patent-issue at www.heise.de. IBM grants this
patens to all projects, which follow one of the licenses, which are approved
by the open-source-initiative. And the BSD-license is as far as I see
approved (I found "New BSD license").
When releasing commercial closed
