Re: contrib/postgis spatial extensions

> Paul Ramsey writes:
>
> > Otherwise problems, just the problem of our being there first: most
> > people won't be sufficiently loyal to the BSD licence to want to
> > reimplement the whole OpenGIS spec when there's already an open source
> > version around.
>
> That's exactly my point. We at PostgreSQL have confirmed many times that
> the BSD license is not just a historical accident but a desired feature of
> our product. I think we should not compromise that by effectively
> endorsing and supporting a partial replacement for our product that does
> not meet these standards.

OK, I have thought about this for a day, and I have some ideas. First,
let me say that GIS capability would be a major PostgreSQL feature, and
would showcase our extensibility.

Second, let me mention that our license is designed to allow a company
to take PostgreSQL, spend lots of time adding some neat data type, and
then sell a closed version to recoup their expenses. We also want to be
considerate of others who don't want their work used in this way and
want their code GPL'ed.

With that said, I think there are three issues with the GIS patch:

size
license (GPL)
duplication of existing types

Let me suggest a solution. What if we took the part of the GIS code
that duplicated our existing code (geometric types) and replaced what we
had in the core distribution with the GIS version. The geometric types
are one of the few areas that have been untended over the years. Seems
a new implementation, based on the GIS specification, would be a great
idea. We would have to add some backward compatibility stuff to help
people load their old data and port their applications, but it may be a
big win for PostgreSQL.

Second, we could give the GIS folks CVS permission so they could
maintain the new geometric types.

Third, we could take the remaining GIS-specific part of PostGIS and move
it into /contrib with a GPL.

This would tie the PostGIS project closer to PostgreSQL, giving them
greater visibility and increase the use of PostGIS. This makes a
non-GPL GIS on top of PostgreSQL even less likely because PostGIS will
be much more visible and GIS people will be directly involved with core
PostgreSQL features.

It also reduces the size of the patch, because we are removing existing
code that was never really maintained.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026