| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nico Williams <nico(at)cryptonector(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Chris Travers <chris(dot)travers(at)adjust(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: How can we submit code patches that implement our (pending) patents? |
| Date: | 2018-07-27 17:01:40 |
| Message-ID: | 20180727170140.nf4rv7k6k6ddmp4g@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2018-07-27 11:15:00 -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> Even assuming you can't change the PG license, you could still:
>
> - require disclosure in contributions
That really has no upsides, except poison the area. Either we reject
the patch and people doing so can reasonably be expected to know about
the patents, making further contributions by them worse. Or we accept
the patch, and the listed patents make the commercial offerings harder,
further development more dubious, readers can reasonably be concerned
about being considered do know about the patents in independent
projects.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2018-07-27 17:05:18 | Re: Deprecating, and scheduling removal of, pg_dump's tar format. |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2018-07-27 17:00:18 | Re: Upper limit arguments of pg_logical_slot_xxx_changes functions accept invalid values |