X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADE489DC8AA for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 05:57:49 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 30159-07 for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 05:57:51 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from mx-2.sollentuna.net (mx-2.sollentuna.net [195.84.163.199]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48A649DC84C for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 05:57:46 -0400 (AST) Received: from ALGOL.sollentuna.se (janus.sollentuna.se [62.65.68.67]) by mx-2.sollentuna.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E1E68F285 for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 10:57:47 +0100 (CET) Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Subject: Web code license Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 10:57:47 +0100 Message-ID: <6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCEA3515C@algol.sollentuna.se> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Web code license Thread-Index: AcZJqT5bdjusHjWyT+evEj3UA8h8Ag== From: "Magnus Hagander" To: X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.103 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.103] X-Spam-Score: 0.103 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200603/101 X-Sequence-Number: 9691 So... I'm looking at putting in the code for the "new techdocs" in cvs sometime soon, and realised I forgot this question :) The code uses tinymce (http://tinymce.moxiecode.com/) for visual editing. This is LGPL code. My question is, should this be added to cvs (with appropriate license files etc, of course), or should it be kept outside (like the PEAR components we rely on for example).=20 I personally think it should be added to cvs, because that makes life a lot easier. But given the discussions lately about the license for the graphics, I figured it's much better to bring it up here before actualyil doing anything :) Unlike the license on the graphics, LGPL should be "enough compatible" with BSD for our use, I beleive. And the site will still work without it, you just don't get visual editing. Thoughts? //Magnus