Re: User locks code

> > Tom Lane wrote:
> > >
> > > I definitely agree with Vadim here: it's fairly silly that the
> > > contrib userlock code is GPL'd, when it consists only of a few dozen
> > > lines of wrapper for the real functionality that's in the main backend.
> >
>
> I was incorrect in something I said to Vadim. I said stored procedures
> would have to be released if linked against a GPL'ed backend. They have
> to be released only if they are in C or another object file linked into
> the backend. PlpgSQL or SQL functions don't have to be released because
> their code is "loaded" into the backend as a script, not existing in the
> backend binary or required for the backend to run.
>
> > Maybe it makes Massimo feel good ? It seems a worhty reason to me, as
> > he has contributed a lot of useful stuff over the time.
>
> Yes, that is probably it. The GPL doesn't give anything to users, it
> takes some control away from users and gives it to the author of the
> code.

I have to disagree here. GPL gives users the assurance that code can't be
modified and distributed under a more restrictive licence, for example with
no source code available or restrictions on commercial use.

On the contrary BSD doesn't guarantee almost anything on this sense.
Think about what happened with the original Kerberos and the microsoft
version which was deliberately modified to prevent compatibilty with
non microsoft implementations. This has been possible only because it
was released under BSD licence. This why I prefer GPL over BSD.

I choosed to release my code under GPL because I'm more concerned with
freedom of software than with commercial issues of it.

Anyway, please stop this thread. I will change the licence of my contrib
code and make it compatible with postgres licence.

After all, as someone poited out, it is a very trivial code and I don't
really care about what people is doing with it.

> > I really think that mixing licences inside one program is bad, if not
> > for
> > any other reason then for confusing people and making them have
> > discussions
> > like this.
>
> Yes, the weird part is that the BSD license is so lax (don't sue us)
> that it is the addition of the GPL that changes the affect of the
> license. If you added a BSD license to a GPL'ed piece of code, the
> effect would be near zero.
>
> > > Besides, anyone who actually wanted to use the userlock code would need
> > > only to write their own wrapper functions to get around the GPL license.
> >
> > This is a part of copyright law that eludes me - can i write a
> > replacement
> > function for something so simple that it can essentially be done in one
> > way only (like incrementing a value by one) ?
>
> Sure, if you don't cut and paste the code line by line, or retype the
> code while staring at the previous version. That is how Berkeley got
> unix-free version of the BSD operating system. However, the few places
> where they lazily copied got them in trouble.
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
> pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
> + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
> + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
>

--
Massimo Dal Zotto

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Massimo Dal Zotto email: dz(at)cs(dot)unitn(dot)it |
| Via Marconi, 141 phone: ++39-0461534251 |
| 38057 Pergine Valsugana (TN) www: http://www.cs.unitn.it/~dz/ |
| Italy pgp: see my www home page |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+