Re: Is PostGreSql's Data storage mechanism "inferior"?

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

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  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