From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Andrej Ricnik-Bay" <andrej(dot)groups(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Tony Caduto" <tony_caduto(at)amsoftwaredesign(dot)com>, "Postgres General List" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Is PostGreSql's Data storage mechanism "inferior"? |
Date: | 2008-02-01 06:58:36 |
Message-ID: | 19138.1201849116@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Andrej Ricnik-Bay" <andrej(dot)groups(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On 01/02/2008, Tony Caduto <tony_caduto(at)amsoftwaredesign(dot)com> wrote:
>> The part about the BSD license is bogus. A BSD license is the most
>> desirable of any Open Source license and gives you the right to use
>> PostgreSQL in your commercial apps without worry.
> While I'm a big fan of the BSD license (for varied reasons) I think that
> OpenSource hardliners like RMS would argue that the BSD license is *NOT*
> in the true spirit of OpenSource *BECAUSE* of what you list as a bonus
> of it ... the locking down of benefits reaped from OpenSource not getting
> back into the stream.
The quoted article knocked *both* GPL and BSD as being "too open". Too
open for whom, he didn't say. The rest of the article is at about the
same quality level :-( I have seldom seen such a sterling example of
cluelessness combined with FUD-spouting.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Adam Rich | 2008-02-01 07:08:16 | Re: Dump schema without the functions |
Previous Message | Stefan Schwarzer | 2008-02-01 06:49:25 | Dump schema without the functions |