Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Licence: GNU/GPL

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Anyway, let's look at it this way.  If we allow for proprietary versions
> > of PostgreSQL, it is hard to imagine why we couldn't make a GPL version
> > _without_ the agreement of past contributors.  We have to keep the BSD
> > part about giving credit and no sueing, but we can clearly _add_ the GPL
> > cruft if we wanted to and all current/future developers agree.  It is
> > basically a GPL fork of PostgreSQL, rather than a proprietary fork.
> 
> Well, (a) not all current developers will agree, (b) you need to get
> past developers in there too, and (c) I'm not as sure as you are that
> we can simply plaster GPL on top of BSD-licensed code.  The GPL does
> not like merging GPL code with not-GPL code, free or otherwise.  See
>      
>      b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
>      whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any
>      part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third
>                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>      parties under the terms of this License.
>              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> This is the "viral" aspect of GPL that so many people have complained of.
> 
> But wait a sec; the last thing we need here is yet another license
> discussion.  Given that the objective of this FAQ addition is to prevent
> future license flamewars, I think the last thing we want it to do is
> give any suggestion that GPL-izing the code might actually be feasible.
> Why are you so eager to suggest that that might be possible?

I am not trying to suggest GPL. I merely think we should be honest that
we don't want GPL.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026