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

Re: ARC patent

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Jeff Davis <jdavis-pgsql(at)empires(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: ARC patent
Date: 2005-01-17 20:30:39
Message-ID: (view raw or whole thread)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
>If PostgreSQL 8.0 is released with ARC, and then PostgreSQL 8.1 is
>released without ARC, and then the patent is granted to IBM, would
>everyone be fine if they just all switched to 8.1 at that time? Or would
>we have some kind of retroactive problem? Would people that are still
>using 8.0 in production, but not distributing it, have difficulty?
The biggest problem is going to be that if we release 8 with
the patented stuff, then for a minimum of 3 years there will
be liability for anyone running 8.

We still have people running 7.1 and once you get something
into production you typically don't just "change" it.

Basically I think the fact that we are even considering leaving
the knowingly infringing code in 8 is presenting a horrible
face to the community.


Joshua D. Drake

>	Jeff
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org

Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC
Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-667-4564 - jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com -
PostgreSQL Replicator -- production quality replication for PostgreSQL

Attachment: jd.vcf
Description: text/x-vcard (285 bytes)

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2005-01-17 20:48:38
Subject: Re: ARC patent
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2005-01-17 20:27:43
Subject: Re: [pgsql-ru-general] [HACKERS] Final call for translation updates

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2015 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group