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

Re: SEPostgres - on track for 8.4?

From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SEPostgres - on track for 8.4?
Date: 2008-10-23 18:01:55
Message-ID: 20081023180155.GM3413@commandprompt.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 10:17:43AM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> So, if anyone *does* know about patents in this area, please keep that 
> knowledge to yourself.

Unless, of course, you're committing, writing, or reviewing the code,
at which point you're actually infringing.  Then you have to say
something.

But it'd be a very bad idea to go trolling through patent databases in
any effort to "educate" oneself.  We don't encourage lawyers to
submit patches to PostgreSQL because they're not coders, and don't
have the relevant experience.  We should avoid the temptation to do
likewise, _mutatis mutandis_.

Even if you are among the people who think that we should follow the
Shakespearean advice and kill all the lawyers, the fact is that law is
a technical specialty that requires years of training and experience
to do well, particularly in very tricky areas like patent law.  If the
project needs it at some point in future, there is legal advice
available through the PostgreSQL fund at SPI.  Until that unhappy day,
I encourage the avoidance of speculation on any patent matters related
to Postgres.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs(at)commandprompt(dot)com
+1 503 667 4564 x104
http://www.commandprompt.com/

In response to

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Robert TreatDate: 2008-10-23 19:22:25
Subject: Re: SEPostgres - on track for 8.4?
Previous:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2008-10-23 17:17:43
Subject: Re: SEPostgres - on track for 8.4?

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