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

Re: GNU readline and BSD license

From: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>, Alfred Perlstein <bright(at)wintelcom(dot)net>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: GNU readline and BSD license
Date: 2000-12-29 23:49:33
Message-ID: Pine.BSF.4.21.0012291948030.430-100000@thelab.hub.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, Tom Lane wrote:

> Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> writes:
> > How different is the feature set?
> 
> I was going to ask the same thing.  If it's an exact replacement then
> OK, but I do not want to put up with non-Emacs-compatible keybindings,
> to mention just one likely issue.
> 
> The whole thing really strikes me as make-work anyway.  Linux is GPL'd;
> does anyone want to argue that we shouldn't run on Linux?  Since we
> are not including libreadline in our distribution, there is NO reason
> to worry about using it when it's available.  Wanting to find a
> replacement purely because of the license amounts to license bigotry,
> IMHO.

Actually, IMHO, the pro to moving to libedit is that we could include it
as part of the distribution and make history a *standard* feature
... licensing started the thread, but I think its gone beyond that were we
have a way of providing an feature that is currently option as part of the
system as a whole ...

"one less package that you need to install" ...


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alfred PerlsteinDate: 2000-12-29 23:51:41
Subject: Re: GNU readline and BSD license
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2000-12-29 23:43:38
Subject: Re: GNU readline and BSD license

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