On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Dave Page <dpage at pgadmin.org> wrote:

> On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Gurjeet Singh <singh.gurjeet at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Thanks. I'll let the client know the difference (or the similarity).
> >
> > Any place where I can find this license in source code, or on website
> which
> > specifically says Slony-I is licensed as...
> >
> > Or should I rely on the
> http://www.slony.info/documentation/LEGALNOTICE.html
> > ? Which is linked from the 'Copyright' link on
> > http://www.slony.info/documentation/index.html .
>
> Rely on the licence text that ship with the package (in the docs, by
> the look of it), not the name


Hackers,

I looked around in the 2.0.3 code a bit and couldn't find LEGALNOTICE.html
or any other file explicitly stating that Slony uses the same license as
PostgreSQL. IMHO, having PostgreSQL license copied in LEGALNOTICE.html is
not helpful either as that text does not mention the word Slony anywhere,
and Slony is not part of Postgres.

Dave and I had a small chat, and we are of the opinion that having a LICENSE
file in the top-level directory might be helpful for anyone looking for this
info.

Postgres has the COPYRIGHT file, which is much easier to find and read than
Slony's doc/adminguide/legal.sgml

Regards,
-- 
gurjeet.singh
@ EnterpriseDB - The Enterprise Postgres Company
http://www.enterprisedb.com

singh.gurjeet@{ gmail | yahoo }.com
Twitter/Skype: singh_gurjeet

Mail sent from my BlackLaptop device
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.slony.info/pipermail/slony1-hackers/attachments/20100514/4bd3f9eb/attachment.htm