Re: Is PostGreSql's Data storage mechanism "inferior"?

andrej.groups@gmail.com ("Andrej Ricnik-Bay") writes:
> On 01/02/2008, Tony Caduto <tony_caduto@amsoftwaredesign.com> wrote:
>> The part about the BSD license is bogus. A BSD license is the most
>> desirable of any Open Source license and gives you the right to use
>> PostgreSQL in your commercial apps without worry.

> While I'm a big fan of the BSD license (for varied reasons) I think that
> OpenSource hardliners like RMS would argue that the BSD license is *NOT*
> in the true spirit of OpenSource *BECAUSE* of what you list as a bonus
> of it ... the locking down of benefits reaped from OpenSource not getting
> back into the stream.

RMS wouldn't argue that, because he is uninterested in "OpenSource."
That's a term created/popularized by Eric Raymond, who is no friend of
RMS.

RMS is interested in "free software," and considers various
"BSD-related" licenses to be reasonable choices for free software.

   <http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html>

He'd prefer that people use the GPL, but I don't think there's
anything overly "hard line" about the notion of the author of a
license preferring it to others.  It would seem mighty odd if he said
something like "I wrote the GPL, but think you should use the <Foo
License> instead."
--
"cbbrowne","@","cbbrowne.com"
http://cbbrowne.com/info/linuxxian.html
Jumping  off a  cliff doesn't  kill you!  It's only  when you  hit the
ground...