Subject: Re: Sleepycat Software DB 2.x library licensing vs. NetBSD
To: John F. Woods <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: David Brownlee <email@example.com>
Date: 09/18/1998 15:37:31
On Fri, 18 Sep 1998, John F. Woods wrote:
> > > That has allowed various companies to build propriety solutions around
> > > NetBSD.
> > ... however I fail to see how the DB 2.x copyright licensing
> > restrictions would impede the derivation of proprietary products from
> > NetBSD since it is no doubt trivial to obtain commercial licensing for
> > DB 2.x that would forgo the need for a vendor to distribute source code
> > to their proprietary solution.
Switching the API used in the existing NetBSD code to that of the
2.x version would allow people who wanted to easily drop in the
licenced version, while still allowing the rest of us to stick
with 1.x ...
-=- "Old Red he died, and every single landlord in the district cried" -=-