Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Patent issues and 8.1

From: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
Cc: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>,Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>,PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Patent issues and 8.1
Date: 2005-01-26 18:03:03
Message-ID: 20050126140107.U81692@ganymede.hub.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

--0-918242224-1106762583=:81692
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005, Hannu Krosing wrote:

> Ühel kenal päeval (teisipäev, 25. jaanuar 2005, 21:10-0400), kirjutas
> Marc G. Fournier:
>> On Tue, 25 Jan 2005, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>>> So if we have to address it we call it 8.0.7 or something.  My point is
>>> that we don't need to address it until we actually find out the patent
>>> is being enforced against someone, and that possibility is quite unlikely.
>>
>> Ah, so you are advocating waiting *until* the problem exists, even *after*
>> we know a) there may be a problem and b) we know that we can fix it ... ?
>
> It may be my englisk skills, as I'm not a native speaker, but your
> temporal logic escapes me ...
>
> ... waiting *until* the problem exists ... there *may be* a problem ...
>
> so *bruce* advocates waiting *until* there *is* a problem, *we* know it
> *may be* (*there* ?) and we know we *can* fix the problem that *may
> be* ?

Now you've totally confused me *shakes head*

Bruce is advocating waiting until the Patent has been Granted, instead of 
doing something about it now, when we know the patent is going through the 
system (and will likely get granted) ... a "reactive" vs "proactive" 
response to the problem.

Basically, after the patent is granted, we are going to scramble to get 
rid of the ARC stuff, instead of taking the time leadign up to the 
granting to get rid of it so that when granted, it isn't something we have 
to concern ourselves with ...

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664
--0-918242224-1106762583=:81692--

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: George EssigDate: 2005-01-26 18:12:12
Subject: Deferrable Unique Constraints
Previous:From: noman naeemDate: 2005-01-26 17:58:08
Subject: Data statement format used by the .sh scripts

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group