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

Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Software Patents

From: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
To: Chris Travers <chris(at)travelamericas(dot)com>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>,Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>,"Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org,pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Software Patents
Date: 2005-04-23 02:00:38
Message-ID: 4269AC46.1000505@samurai.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacypgsql-www
Chris Travers wrote:
> Would you be opposed to a simple writeup of why ARC was replaced with 2Q 
> and why IBM's assurances of non-enforcement against open source products 
> was insufficient?

I think a fair number of individuals were somewhat confused by how we 
dealt with the ARC situation. Explaining what our reasoning was is 
probably a good idea.

> Or in your view, should we be directing people to the mailing list 
> archives for their primary source on the political positions we as a 
> community have been forced to take for reasons beyond our immediate 
> control?

I don't see how we've taken a "political position" due to ARC. We had a 
problem that might have inhibited the use of PostgreSQL by some people, 
so we worked around it.

-Neil

In response to

pgsql-www by date

Next:From: Christopher BrowneDate: 2005-04-23 03:59:39
Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] Software Patents
Previous:From: Chris TraversDate: 2005-04-22 22:14:05
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Software Patents

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Christopher BrowneDate: 2005-04-23 03:59:39
Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] Software Patents
Previous:From: Chris TraversDate: 2005-04-22 22:14:05
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Software Patents

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