On Fri, 2011-02-11 at 14:59 +0100, Michael Banck wrote: > On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 06:04:46PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > Less narrow-minded interpretation of GPL requirements, perhaps. > > (And yes, we have real lawyers on staff considering these issues.) > > Is their opinion public/can be made public? This might possibly lead to > a re-evaluation of the situation by Debian.
I certainly hope so. Although, what I question is... Did Debian seek legal advice? Debian does have a corporation of which I am a director for. Software in the Public Interest. I don't recall a legal request coming through from the DPL? > > > If Debian want to shoot themselves in the foot like that, we can't > > stop them > > BTW, that change has been merged into Ubuntu and will be (as of now) in > the next Ubuntu release. Yeah see, that is something that raises my red-alert bells. As popular as Debian is, the "user" population is squarely in Ubuntu world and that has some serious public implications as a whole. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 509.416.6579 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering http://twitter.com/cmdpromptinc | http://identi.ca/commandprompt -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
