| From: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: LGPL |
| Date: | 2005-06-18 06:17:57 |
| Message-ID: | 200506180217.58648.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Saturday 18 June 2005 01:43, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On 6/18/05, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> ... But is it really the case that PostgreSQL developers are being
> paid to code because PG is BSDed and proprietary forks are possible?
> ... There is no harm in being BSDed, but I question that the users of
> PostgreSQL are gaining enough advantage that there needs to be so much
> paranoia about making sure that the code is as easy as possible to
> make propritary forks of...
SRA, Greenplumb, and EnterpriseDB are just three of the companies that both
subsidize development and release non-bsd/proprietary versions of PostgreSQL.
You can bet they wouldn't be so quick to work with us if we weren't BSD
licensed. The community benefits greatly from our BSD license, and IMHO it
is the central factor that will eventually allow postgresql to achive total
world domination ;-)
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Treat | 2005-06-18 06:38:28 | Re: Utility database (Was: RE: Autovacuum in the backend) |
| Previous Message | Gregory Maxwell | 2005-06-18 05:43:50 | Re: LGPL |