| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Amonson, Paul D" <paul(dot)d(dot)amonson(at)intel(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Shankaran, Akash" <akash(dot)shankaran(at)intel(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal for Updating CRC32C with AVX-512 Algorithm. |
| Date: | 2024-06-25 17:48:43 |
| Message-ID: | ZnsC-4bjTt9m93HB@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 05:41:12PM +0000, Amonson, Paul D wrote:
> > It would be good to know exactly what, if any, changes the Intel
> > lawyers want us to make to our license if we accept this patch.
>
> I asked about this and there is nothing Intel requires here license
> wise. They believe that there is nothing wrong with including Clause-3
> BSD like licenses under the PostgreSQL license. They only specified
> that for the source file, the applying license need to be present
> either as a link (which was previously discouraged in this thread)
> or the full text. Please note that I checked and for this specific
> Chromium license there is not SPDX codename so the entire text is
> required.
Okay, that is very interesting. Yes, we will have no problem
reproducing the exact license text in the source code. I think we can
remove the license issue as a blocker for this patch.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Only you can decide what is important to you.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David E. Wheeler | 2024-06-25 17:48:45 | Re: Patch bug: Fix jsonpath .* on Arrays |
| Previous Message | Amonson, Paul D | 2024-06-25 17:41:12 | RE: Proposal for Updating CRC32C with AVX-512 Algorithm. |