Dann Corbit wrote:
>You are making an assumption that the follwing sentence is only valid
>under conditions of the first. That is nowhere stated. That connection
>is only implied by your interpretation.
>
>
Not at all. the phrase "This means" clearly refers to what went before.
>Even a trivial and absurd lawsuit can have disastrous consequences.
>Consider SCO verses IBM.
>
>
>
Fine. You sit quaking with fear in your boots. I won't. BTW, according
to my legal theory *I* own all the code to Postgres. Bizarre? Sure, but
don't let that stop you worrying about it.
One more thing - there is a Cygwin port of Postgres that *is* linked
against Cygwin libraries - I haven't heard anybody suggesting that that
has infected us with GPLing the code.
Let's get real.
andrew