| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Alfred Perlstein <bright(at)wintelcom(dot)net>, The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: GNU readline and BSD license |
| Date: | 2000-12-29 23:43:38 |
| Message-ID: | 7732.978133418@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> writes:
> How different is the feature set?
I was going to ask the same thing. If it's an exact replacement then
OK, but I do not want to put up with non-Emacs-compatible keybindings,
to mention just one likely issue.
The whole thing really strikes me as make-work anyway. Linux is GPL'd;
does anyone want to argue that we shouldn't run on Linux? Since we
are not including libreadline in our distribution, there is NO reason
to worry about using it when it's available. Wanting to find a
replacement purely because of the license amounts to license bigotry,
IMHO.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | The Hermit Hacker | 2000-12-29 23:49:33 | Re: GNU readline and BSD license |
| Previous Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2000-12-29 22:56:32 | Re: NULLS and <> : Discrepancies ? |