Re: contrib and licensing
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org>
Cc: "Dann Corbit" <DCorbit@connx.com>,
"scott.marlowe" <scott.marlowe@ihs.com>, "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org>, "mlw" <pgsql@mohawksoft.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2003-04-03T05:04:33Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org> writes: >> And your point is? > That everyone is being entirely too picky. Hey, we link against other > things, too. Some aren't LGPL. The readline example is a good one, > incidentally: it's GPL. Yeah, it's an excellent example: there is an alternative implementation under a different license (libedit). > And its stubs are in the backend, of all places. Really? I must have missed that. > One could clean-room reimplement if the demand is enough. Certainly, any of this stuff *could* be reimplemented. But for stuff that's being proposed for contrib, what's theoretically possible given enough demand isn't the important real-world issue. Contrib stuff is, by definition, stuff that hasn't yet had all that much work put into it. So it's appropriate to ask where it can really run *right now*. regards, tom lane