Re: PG Installer - Licensing Issues

On 08/15/2012 06:45 PM, Andrew Hastie wrote:
> As I understand it, I am allowed to redistribute Postgres so long as I
> include the copyright notice plus paragraphs as detailed on
> http://www.postgresql.org/about/licence/.
>
> What I want to confirm is that the one-click installer (which I
> understand was supplied by EnterpriseDB) can also be redistributed such
> that I can bundle Postgres with my "product", and also use the
> non-interactive installer
> (http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community/pginst-guide#interactive)
> such that I can make the installation as easy as possible for my users.

This is something I've wanted to raise for a while, and here's a chance.

I'm concerned that the One-click installers are being (ab)used in 3rd
party software, where they're often used to silently install and
uninstall Pg with the default service account, service name, port, etc.

That's a great way to stomp on any existing install the user has made
themselves. I'm particularly concerned about silent uninstalls, though.

The move to the generic service account will help, in that it'll get rid
of the problems with people needing the password to the "postgres"
account created by some silent installer.

In an ideal world the installer would offer "branding" or similar, where
it can be installed with a non-default port, non-default product ID in
the registry, etc; generally sit side-by-side with the same version
installed normally.

I know that's a bunch of work though. Instead, is it worth mentioning
where the (un)install is documented that users of the option should
consider what happens when the user has already installed PostgreSQL
themselves or as part of another product? And maybe offering advice on
the correct use of the .zip binary packages as an alternative for
bundling with an application?

--
Craig Ringer