Subject: Re: CDROM/book products
From: kragen@pobox.com (Kragen)
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 16:30:31 -0500 (EST)

On Sat, 14 Nov 1998, Keith Bostic wrote:
> Actually, Berkeley DB has never NOT been an open-source license
> product.  Early versions of DB (e.g., 1.85) were under the UC
> Berkeley license, more recent ones are under the one you saw,
> all of them are OSD.

I thought I remembered a time when there were conditions that
prohibited commercial redistribution, modification and/or use.  And
download.html seems to imply there are: "Berkeley DB may be freely
redistributed and used under most non-commercial conditions.".

Perhaps I had just been misled by download.html.

> > I notice that <URL:http://www.sleepycat.com/download.html> still
> > claims the license is not open-source.  Perhaps this is an oversight
> > in download.html, not in license.net?
> 
> I was hoping the wording would get the same open-source idea across,
> though -- any suggestions on how to reword it?

Well, the conditions in the license appear to allow commercial use,
distribution, and modification, as well as incorporation into
commercial software, as long as you include source whenever you
distribute it (or make it available).

If I had written download.html, I would have just said, "Berkeley DB
may be freely redistributed, used, and modified (see the license for
specific details)."

Thanks for the information!

Kragen

-- 
<kragen@pobox.com>       Kragen Sitaker     <http://www.pobox.com/~kragen/>
Irony and sarcasm deflate seriousness, and when your seriousness becomes detum-
escent, you're not held responsible for your thoughts. Irony beats thinking like
rock beats scissors. -- http://www.hyperorg.com/backissues/joho-june2-98.html