From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Patrick Macdonald <patrickm(at)redhat(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, darcy(at)druid(dot)net |
Subject: | Re: contrib/pg_filedump - PostgreSQL File Dump Utility |
Date: | 2002-02-06 23:22:49 |
Message-ID: | 200202062322.g16NMnY13103@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > A larger issue is that this code wants to be in contrib. I don't see
> > any other GPL code in contrib.
>
> You didn't look very hard then; a grep for 'General Public License' finds
>
Yea, I looked only for GPL, not the longer string. Good find.
> as well as hits in ODBC, some autoconf input files, and flex and bison
> output files. The autoconf/flex/bison hits are not a problem because
> those have special exemption clauses in their licenses. And ODBC uses
> LGPL, which doesn't have the "viral" properties of GPL, so it's not a
> threat to the rest of our distribution.
>
> I do have concerns about including these six contrib modules in our
> distribution, however. It could be argued that the terms of the GPL
> forbid that.
Yes, I see your point. We better figure out what we need to do, if
anything, and do it. I don't see any key pieces in that listing.
--
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
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2002-02-06 23:34:35 | Re: contrib/pg_filedump - PostgreSQL File Dump Utility |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-02-06 23:18:52 | Re: contrib/pg_filedump - PostgreSQL File Dump Utility |