Re: contrib and licensing

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com
Cc: JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com, scrappy(at)hub(dot)org, scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: contrib and licensing
Date: 2003-04-03 15:54:26
Message-ID: 28820.1049385266@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com writes:
> If I find a wiz-bang library that allows me to do something cool very
> easily, and I write a some code that would be good for postgresql's contrib,
> are you saying that it would not be usable because of the requirement of the
> library that is not included on standard system installations?

The issue here is whether PG's contrib directory is the most appropriate
distribution mechanism for such code. There are at least two other
paths for distribution of PG add-ons: you can make a gborg project, or
you can distribute the add-on along with the wiz-bang library it depends
on (assuming you can interest the developers of libwizbang, which in
this case is presumably not a problem). In either of those cases
there's no problem at all with LGPL or GPL license terms.

We have taken a policy decision to keep the PG core distribution
(including contrib) straight BSD license --- and in my mind that
definitely includes not depending on any outside functionality that is
both (a) essential and (b) not available anywhere as BSD-license code.
It should be possible to build a PG installation that is pure BSD.
Whether people actually choose to do so is not the point.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-04-03 16:07:44 Re: more contrib: log rotator
Previous Message Jan Wieck 2003-04-03 15:53:58 Re: contrib and licensing