Jan Wieck wrote:Greg Stark wrote:
> Jan Wieck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> the point is that PostgreSQL is no GNU product, never has been and if someone
>> intends to he shall do so after yanking out the contributions I made.
> > Note that when you released your contributions you did so under a license that
> imposed no such conditions. If Microsoft wanted to release a Microsoft
> Postgresql under a completely proprietary license they would be free to do so.
> Likewise if someone wanted to release a GPL'd "GNU Postgresql" they could do
> it. And nobody could force either to yank anyone's code.
I released my contributions under the BSD license. A license change is only possible when accepted by the Copyright holder. I might have missed something, but when did Microsoft get the Copyright of my code?
We allow companies to make commercial versions of PostgreSQL that use a proprietary license, so I don't see you could prevent Microsoft from doing the same.
The BSD license allows everyone to use the code in proprietary software. But that doesn't mean that you can relicense THAT code. I seem to remember that one of our arguments against license changes was that we'd need written agreement from all former contributors. Is that wrong?
Jan
-- #======================================================================# # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # #================================================== [EMAIL PROTECTED] #
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
