Suitable licence for schema components

From: Bernard Quatermass <toolsmith(at)quatermass(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Suitable licence for schema components
Date: 2019-09-13 16:43:38
Message-ID: 6A25D874-3728-4129-A9B9-916987EDCA02@quatermass.co.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

I’ve started on extracting some of the DB backed tables and stored procedures I’ve developed for use behind my jpigd helper (https://gitlab.quatermass.co.uk/jpig/jpigd <https://gitlab.quatermass.co.uk/jpig/jpigd>) and was wondering what informed folks here felt as to the most appropriate licence for releasing frameworks that live in their own schemas.

The most obvious ones that come to mind would be GPLV3+ or the PostgreSQL License <http://www.opensource.org/licenses/postgresql> and I was wondering about the applicability of GPLV3 if the framework essentially constitutes a library and it possible pollution of the using project.

Regarding the frameworks themselves, they’re not tied to the daemon itself but are designed to provide specific elements of backend functionality that I’ve needed as part of some ongoing development.

* An application password test/encode framework that knows about a lot of common formats but can automatically upgrade to a default (leaving only the unused accounts in old formats.
* A JSON-RPC decode/dispatch framework (bi-mode handles a direct DB connection doing JSON-RPC calls and also a similar mech behind jpigd with web session cookie management).

I expect to get the first drop of these beasts in a week or two once I’ve cleanly extricated them from the original project and got some form of test-case stuff in place.

So, what does everybody feel about the suitable licences for this ?


Bernard Quatermass.

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message SERHAD ERDEM 2019-09-13 17:38:39 Re: No primary key table
Previous Message Ron 2019-09-13 15:45:39 Re: No primary key table