| From: | "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM> |
|---|---|
| To: | "'Martin A(dot) Marques'" <martin(at)math(dot)unl(dot)edu(dot)ar>, Adam Haberlach <adam(at)newsnipple(dot)com>, Don Baccus <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | RE: beta testing version |
| Date: | 2000-12-05 19:24:34 |
| Message-ID: | 8F4C99C66D04D4118F580090272A7A234D31CB@sectorbase1.sectorbase.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > I totaly missed your point here. How closing source of
> > ERserver is related to closing code of PostgreSQL DB server?
> > Let me clear things:
> >
> > 1. ERserver isn't based on WAL. It will work with any version >= 6.5
> >
> > 2. WAL was partially sponsored by my employer, Sectorbase.com,
> > not by PG, Inc.
>
> Has somebody thought about putting PG in the GPL licence
> instead of the BSD?
> PG inc would still be able to do there money giving support
> (just like IBM, HP and Compaq are doing there share with Linux),
> without been able to close the code.
ERserver is *external* application that change *nothing* in
PostgreSQL code. So, no matter under what licence are
server code, any company will be able to close code of
any privately developed *external* application.
And I don't see what's wrong with this, do you?
Vadim
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Martin A. Marques | 2000-12-05 19:34:28 | Re: beta testing version |
| Previous Message | Martin A. Marques | 2000-12-05 19:23:40 | Re: beta testing version |