From owner-freebsd-current Tue May 2 8:34:18 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mail.enteract.com (mail.enteract.com [207.229.143.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AE3B37B978 for ; Tue, 2 May 2000 08:34:04 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dscheidt@enteract.com) Received: from shell-1.enteract.com (dscheidt@shell-1.enteract.com [207.229.143.40]) by mail.enteract.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA63213; Tue, 2 May 2000 10:27:39 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from dscheidt@enteract.com) Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 10:27:39 -0500 (CDT) From: David Scheidt To: Brad Knowles Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp , FreeBSD-CURRENT Mailing List Subject: Re: db 1.85 --> 2.x or 3.x? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, 2 May 2000, Brad Knowles wrote: > At 1:16 PM +0200 2000/5/2, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > > Sleepycats license is not FreeBSD compatible :-/ > > I don't understand. Reading > , it seems to me that FreeBSD > meets all the necessary requirements. Can someone who understands > the details of the licensing issues either explain the situation to > me, or provide pointers to references that do? FreeBSD meets the license requirements. A non-FreeBSD developed application that used the DB interfaces might not. I don't think it would be a good idea for FreeBSD to do things that make it harder to produce commerical software. David Scheidt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message