Re: Postgres development model (was Re: CVS comment)

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Reinoud van Leeuwen <reinoud(dot)v(at)n(dot)leeuwen(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Postgres development model (was Re: CVS comment)
Date: 2004-08-10 18:11:07
Message-ID: 200408102011.07886.peter_e@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Reinoud van Leeuwen wrote:
> Why? I understood that using BitKeeper for free for Open Source
> projects is allowed. (but IANAL).
> It is available (on many platforms). It works great. Once you use
> changesets you'll never want to go back to cvs.

There is a world of a difference between being free (of charge) for open
source projects and being open source itself.

> Producing an Open Source product does not mean that all tools are
> Open Source. Windows isn't and Postgresql is going to support
> windows.

There is also a big difference between supporting some proprietary
software and making proprietary software a de facto requirement for
participating in the development effort.

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-08-10 18:15:22 Re: ErrorContextCallback
Previous Message Tom Lane 2004-08-10 17:53:40 Re: pg_subtrans and WAL