Re: TDS versions
Dossy Shiobara <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.db.tds.freetds |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 2008.05.28, Craig Berry <[email protected]> wrote: > I can't find anything there indicating that TDS is considered to be > one of the MCPP protocols. It's not in the (presumably full) list of > protocols mentioned in the license agreement [...] It may have simply been left off. I'll try to email someone at Microsoft to get a clarification and/or update. > IANAL, but it doesn't sound to me like it's at all compatible with the > LGPL. The MCPP license doesn't seem compatible with GPL/LGPL, but the Open Source pledge sure does. > >This is quite pleasant, IMHO: commercial projects need to license, open > >source doesn't need to explicitly license. > > That may be your opinion, but unless I'm mistaken that's completely > incompatible with the LGPL. [...] If this is indeed the case, then this is yet another strong argument against using the GPL/LGPL. (I personally prefer the MIT/BSD license.) However, multi-licensing of works is not uncommon. Vendors such as MySQL offer code under GPL or commercial license. Microsoft is essentially doing the same here, dual-licensing the specifications. The MCPP licensing may not be GPL/LGPL compatible, but the Open Source pledge should be? (IANAL, etc., so it'd be nice to get actual strong legal advice here.) -- Dossy Shiobara | [email protected] | http://dossy.org/ Panoptic Computer Network | http://panoptic.com/ "He realized the fastest way to change is to laugh at your own folly -- then you can let go and quickly move on." (p. 70)