| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Making tab-complete.c easier to maintain |
| Date: | 2015-10-23 00:09:43 |
| Message-ID: | 20151023000943.GP14196@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2015-10-22 16:26:10 -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> To be affective negatively by libreadline's viral license, an entity
> would need to fork the psql client in proprietary ways that they did
> not wish not to make available to end users, at the same time linking
> in libreadline.
> Maybe I'm missing something big, but I really don't see people out
> there shipping a libreadline-enabled psql client, details of whose
> source they'd want to keep a deep, dark secret.
Isn't that just about every proprietary fork of postgres? Most have
added backend features and I guess many of those have in turn added
support to psql for those features. Sure it'd probably in reality be
relatively harmless for them to release these psql modifications, but I
rather doubt their management will generally see it that way.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Noah Misch | 2015-10-23 00:51:47 | Re: Re: [BUGS] BUG #13611: test_postmaster_connection failed (Windows, listen_addresses = '0.0.0.0' or '::') |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2015-10-23 00:09:11 | Re: Avoid full page images in streaming replication? |