| From: | Paul M Foster <paulf(at)quillandmouse(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Re: On the _need_ to vacuum... |
| Date: | 2001-04-29 16:31:13 |
| Message-ID: | 20010429123113.B14696@quillandmouse.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Sat, Apr 28, 2001 at 10:22:53PM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> * geustace(at)godzone(dot)net(dot)nz <geustace(at)godzone(dot)net(dot)nz> [010428 21:44] wrote:
> > I am rather staggered by a developer considering it necessary to
> > attempt to cooerce the core development team into including a patch.
>
> I'm assuming you refer to the updated page at:
> http://people.freebsd.org/~alfred/vacfix/
>
I have to agree with this. Alfred's free to do what he likes. I don't
recall that he mentions whether this patch is Open Source. If it isn't,
then this is all moot. It can't be included in PostgreSQL because of
licensing issues. If it _is_ Open Source, then Alfred is free to charge
for it. _However_, he makes the threat of potential legal action if you
should broadly disseminate a previously downloaded copy of the patch.
That's not only not Open Source, it's ANTI- Open Source. On that basis
alone, I would be averse to including it in PostgreSQL. The coercion
issue is secondary and childish.
Paul
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | geustace | 2001-04-29 16:53:42 | Re: On the _need_ to vacuum... |
| Previous Message | Mini-me | 2001-04-29 09:36:38 | Re: Strange PG error |