[OT] open-source license issues

[Daniel Gibson]

Am 12.04.2011 04:00, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
> "Daniel Gibson" <metalcaedes at gmail.com> wrote in message 
> news:io0blg$jsc$5 at digitalmars.com...
>> Am 11.04.2011 17:40, schrieb Kagamin:
>>> Kagamin Wrote:
>>>
>>>> spir Wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> There is a point I don't understand: if I'm right, LGPL as well as all 
>>>>> other
>>>>> "open source", not strictly free-software, licenses allow using 
>>>>> licensed
>>>>> software even for "privative" (proprietary) work. But they wouldn't 
>>>>> allow using
>>>>> software for work licensed under other open-source licenses like the 
>>>>> Boost license?
>>>>> Where's the bug?
>>>>
>>>> They can be used, but they can't become proprietary or Boost licensed.
>>>
>>> I also wander, what people plan to do with libmysql? It's GPL.
>>
>> Doesn't mysql even have some retarded restriction like "it's GPL but may
>> not be used for commercial purposes so buy mysql if you wanna use it to
>> make money"?
>>
>> Maybe someone has already reimplemented a mysql-client under a more free
>> license?
>>
> 
> PostgreSQL? ;)
> 
> 

Well I'd always use PostgreSQL instead of MySQL when having the choice, but
1. often MySQL needs to be used because it's already there
2. PostgreSQL uses the BSD-License which also isn't suitable for Phobos.

BTW: I think PHP has a native SQL driver (under their BSD-style PHP
license) - maybe that could be adapted to be used with D, if it's
written in C. This still couldn't be shipped with Phobos, but at least
there are no stupid restrictions on using it for commercial software.