| From: | Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Promoting PostgreSQL to the world. |
| Date: | 2004-04-29 20:21:28 |
| Message-ID: | 1083270087.30065.408.camel@jester |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-www |
On Thu, 2004-04-29 at 15:56, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > That is my point. Are we going to require a certain level of
> > acceptable usage for someone to use the name?
>
> It's easy to shoot yourself in the foot that way. You may find that the
> next Debian release will contain a package "database whose name we are
> not allowed to use" and everything is stripped of logos and icons
> because they are not free to use. It has happened before.
I think that is different though. They're simply redistributing exactly
what we gave them (compiled, but still the same).
We already have issues with users adding patches to the database, like
CONNECT BY, which have a number of bugs. If Debian applied those patches
by default and a flood of Debian users started complaining about our
buggy software what would we do? If it would be to tell them they're not
using an official release, then it shouldn't have the PostgreSQL name on
it.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2004-04-29 20:35:15 | Re: First two requests for PUGs |
| Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2004-04-29 20:16:36 | Re: Promoting PostgreSQL to the world. |