Subject | Re: [Firebird-general] Licensing |
---|---|
Author | Helen Borrie |
Post date | 2004-03-10T05:00:09Z |
At 02:48 PM 10/03/2004 +1000, you wrote:
customers know about the licensing and where the Firebird sources are.
server embedded in the client library). It's a binary, too.
Deploying any variant of the server and/or client in binary form doesn't
require you to relinquish your source code! :-)
Under the IPL and the IDPL, if you modify the source code of the Firebird
modules, you are required to release *those sources with your
modifications* - that's it. You still don't have to open your own
application code.
/heLen
>I am part of a development team that has recently switched to firebird.None at all. Just include the license.txt when you deploy, so that your
>We are using the database as part of our commercial application. The
>database is installed by our installers transparently to the users. Are
>there any licensing issues with this scenario?
customers know about the licensing and where the Firebird sources are.
> I have looked at other"Embedded" is just one variant of the server (in this case, a dedicated
>discussions that talk about the source, but we are just using firebird
>in its binary form. Some people expressed concerns with using Firebird
>as an "embedded" server I'm not sure what sense they mean embedded i.e.
>the type of server, or like us that our application relies on the
>database?
server embedded in the client library). It's a binary, too.
Deploying any variant of the server and/or client in binary form doesn't
require you to relinquish your source code! :-)
Under the IPL and the IDPL, if you modify the source code of the Firebird
modules, you are required to release *those sources with your
modifications* - that's it. You still don't have to open your own
application code.
/heLen