Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 11:56:43 -0500
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@crankycanuck.ca>
To: pgsql-www@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: change to interfaces.html
Message-ID: <20071116165643.GO24718@crankycanuck.ca>
References: <473C9D0A.1090409@hagander.net> <20071115112738.60c3a837@scratch>
	<9B276A8E7D64C7A3E5CFD1ED@ganymede.hub.org>
	<473D5A2A.9070904@postgresql.org>
	<C198CEF1186974C7C668719D@ganymede.hub.org>
	<473D6006.7080504@postgresql.org>
	<473DB9E9.3000006@commandprompt.com>
	<473DBE05.2030609@postgresql.org>
	<20071116163542.GL24718@crankycanuck.ca>
	<473DC879.8010003@postgresql.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <473DC879.8010003@postgresql.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)

On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 04:42:33PM +0000, Dave Page wrote:
> No - I was pointing out that MySQL are an example of a company using the 
> uncertainty of how the GPL would or would not apply to an ODBC driver to 
> help them sell software.

Perhaps in future we can all avoid dragging dual-licencing schemes into
these sorts of discussions, then, since they're rather a different issue
than GPL-vs-BSD arguments (which don't belong on -www anyway, ISTM).
 
> I should make it clear that I do not believe that is JD/Command Prompt's 
> intention - JD has stated a number of times that they follow the more 
> liberal interpretation.

So what exactly is this argument about, then?

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
Old sigs will return after re-constitution of blue smoke