Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL, LGPL and GPL.

2006-10-20 Thread Alexander Terekhov
Merijn de Weerd wrote: [...] > If you distribute the PostgreSQL server software linked with > the PostGIS software, then you have to comply with the GPL > for both parts of that derivative work. > > If you don't distribute any server software, you do not have > to worry about what the GPL require

Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL, LGPL and GPL.

2006-10-20 Thread Merijn de Weerd
On 2006-10-20, Karen Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you make create a PostgreSQL database that uses PostGIS and you > distribute that database, than your database (tables, stored > procedures, views, etc) are GPL? No, because those tables, stored procedures etc. are not derivative works of

Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL, LGPL and GPL.

2006-10-20 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 03:35:34PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: > Exactly. The "Linus View" is that dynamic linking and "socket > conversations" are *not* linking in the GPL2 meaning, but the FSF & > RMS think differently. The GPL3 seems to codify that strictness. Dynamic linking may be an issue, b

Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL, LGPL and GPL.

2006-10-20 Thread Ron Johnson
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/20/06 13:49, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Karen Hill wrote: >> I was looking through the various contrib packages and pgfoundry >> projects. I noticed that many of them are GPL like PostGIS or LGPL >> like Npgsql. I have questions. >> >> If you ma

Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL, LGPL and GPL.

2006-10-20 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Karen Hill wrote: > John Hasler wrote: > >>> Npgsql is LGPL. It means you must release the source of Npgsql when >>> distributing it, and if you modify Npgsql, but not have to release the >>> source under the (L)GPL of the software that calls Npgsql functions? >> Pretty much, but you must provide

Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL, LGPL and GPL.

2006-10-20 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Karen Hill wrote: > If you make create a PostgreSQL database that uses PostGIS and you > distribute that database, than your database (tables, stored > procedures, views, etc) are GPL? Nothing ever becomes GPL automatically. You may wish to distribute your own work under the GPL, but you don't h

Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL, LGPL and GPL.

2006-10-20 Thread Karen Hill
John Hasler wrote: > > Npgsql is LGPL. It means you must release the source of Npgsql when > > distributing it, and if you modify Npgsql, but not have to release the > > source under the (L)GPL of the software that calls Npgsql functions? > > Pretty much, but you must provide your software in a

Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL, LGPL and GPL.

2006-10-20 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Karen Hill wrote: > I was looking through the various contrib packages and pgfoundry > projects. I noticed that many of them are GPL like PostGIS or LGPL > like Npgsql. I have questions. > > If you make create a PostgreSQL database that uses PostGIS and you > distribute that database, than your

[GENERAL] PostgreSQL, LGPL and GPL.

2006-10-20 Thread Karen Hill
I was looking through the various contrib packages and pgfoundry projects. I noticed that many of them are GPL like PostGIS or LGPL like Npgsql. I have questions. If you make create a PostgreSQL database that uses PostGIS and you distribute that database, than your database (tables, stored proc