Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> > This depends on the definition of open source; I think Netscape is
> > OpenSource these days, but I doubt if anyone would be allowed to take the
> > sources and create "Petscape: The Dog's Browser". But, as far as I know, I
> > could go away tomorrow with the PostgreSQL sources and create "Mostgress",
> > so long as I did not try to sell it. AFAIK, I might even get away with
> > selling it, but it's not really the point.
> Yes you could. The original Postgres developers (or at least some of
> them) did just that in founding Illustra. They sold the company a
> couple of years later for $50M US to Informix.
Actually Postgres was _not_ distributed under the BSD (do-whatever-you-want
give credit) license but a much more restrictive license that required a
permission from UBC to to anything non-educational.
IIRC Stonebraker et al founded Illustra after getting special permissions from
The shift to BSD license (that enabled the current blooming of PostgreSQL ;)
was oftained sometime during the development of postgres 95, with some
considerable backing from Stonebraker.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2000-01-29 20:40:35|
|Subject: ImmediateSharedRelationCacheInvalidate considered harmful|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2000-01-29 19:53:19|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Sure enough, SI buffer overrun is broken |