В сообщении от 23 мая 2007 23:45 Ian Eslick написал(a):
> Yes, that is my understanding and one of the primary motivations for the
> SQL backend and forthcoming lisp backends. -Ian Sent via BlackBerry from
> T-Mobile
Thanks
I am switching to sql backend :)
to make your source available. I'd be very happy to be wrong
> about this so I invite counterarguments!
>
> Ian
>
> Ian
>
> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Dean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 23 May
"Ian Eslick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> isn't it the case that the BDB GPL requires that a public-facing
> website based on BDB make available all the code that is linked with
> it? A commercial license would allow you to bypass this GPL
> restriction so you would need a license unless you wan
rom: Chris Dean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 18:09:41
To:Elephant bugs and development
Subject: Re: [elephant-devel] bdb licencing
Joubert Nel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Reading the Oracle licensing page
...
> 3) They specifically state that you don't need
Joubert Nel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Reading the Oracle licensing page
...
> 3) They specifically state that you don't need a license if your
> application is not distributed to others.
>
> Legally, the clarification then needs to be around what constitutes
> "distribution".
Exactly. That
Thanks for pointing this out.
Looking at the actual license, it seems clear to me that they have
adapted a "BSD-style" license, which
is quite a change from the sleepycat license (which very explicitly
mentioned a public-facing website.)
I will send a note to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the absence of
On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 18:28, Robert L. Read wrote:
> I agree with Ian. Previously, one definitely required a license for
> any public-facing commercial website.
> I have not researched any change that Oracle may or may not have made.
Reading the Oracle licensing page
(http://www.oracle.com/techno
"Robert L. Read" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I agree with Ian. Previously, one definitely required a license for
> any public-facing commercial website. I have not researched any
> change that Oracle may or may not have made.
Wow, news to me. Do you know of a web page or email archive that
c
I agree with Ian. Previously, one definitely required a license for any
public-facing commercial website.
I have not researched any change that Oracle may or may not have made.
On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 16:06 -0400, Ian Eslick wrote:
> On May 23, 2007, at 3:45 PM, Chris Dean wrote:
>
> >
> >> Am I
Ian Eslick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think that Sleepycat, now Oracle clarified that distinction and
> that any public-facing for-profit website needs a license. Robert
> may have more to say on this topic.
Very interesting, do you know of a reference for that does clarify
that distinction
On May 23, 2007, at 3:45 PM, Chris Dean wrote:
Am I right that I can't use elephant+bdb in closed source commercial
application without purchasing licence?
IANAL, but my reading is that if you ship a closed source product you
need a license for Berkeley DB. If you have a service/web site (
-devel] bdb licencing
I have read
http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/berkeley-db/htdocs/licensing.html
and
http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/berkeley-db/htdocs/oslicense.html
Am I right that I can't use elephant+bdb in closed source commercial
application wi
> Am I right that I can't use elephant+bdb in closed source commercial
> application without purchasing licence?
IANAL, but my reading is that if you ship a closed source product you
need a license for Berkeley DB. If you have a service/web site (like
Google, Yahoo, etc) my reading is that you
I have read
http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/berkeley-db/htdocs/licensing.html
and
http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/berkeley-db/htdocs/oslicense.html
Am I right that I can't use elephant+bdb in closed source commercial
application without purchasing licence?
__
14 matches
Mail list logo
