Re: [HACKERS]

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, John Bartlett <johnb(at)fast(dot)fujitsu(dot)com(dot)au>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS]
Date: 2007-02-28 17:36:36
Message-ID: 45E5BDA4.4090106@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I have added this to the developer's FAQ to clarify the situtation of
> posting a patch:
>
> <li>PostgreSQL is licensed under a BSD license. By posting a patch
> to the public PostgreSQL mailling lists, you are giving the PostgreSQL
> Global Development Group the non-revokable right to distribute your
> patch under the BSD license. If you use code that is available under
> some other license that is BSD compatible (eg. public domain), please
> note that in your email submission.</li>

We should add this to the mailing list signup pages and the welcome
pages to the lists.

Joshua D. Drake

>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
>>> Neil Conway wrote:
>>>> For the case in question, sure, requiring some clarification from FJ
>>>> would be reasonable. But more broadly, my point is that I think you're
>>>> fooling yourself if you think that requiring a disclaimer or explicit
>>>> transfer of copyright for this *one* particular patch is likely to make
>>>> any material difference to the overall copyright status of the code
>>>> base.
>>> Yes, I do. If there is an explicit claim, like an email footer or a
>>> copyright in the code, we do try to nail that down.
>> AFAICT, the footer in question tries to make it illegal for us even to
>> have the message in our mail archives. If I were running the PG lists,
>> I would install filters that automatically reject mails containing such
>> notices, with a message like "Your corporate lawyers do not deserve to
>> have access to the internet. Go away until you've acquired a clue."
>>
>> I fully support Bruce's demand that patches be submitted with no such
>> idiocy attached.
>>
>> regards, tom lane
>

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2007-02-28 17:37:09 Re: [HACKERS]
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2007-02-28 17:34:52 Re: COMMIT NOWAIT Performance Option

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2007-02-28 17:37:09 Re: [HACKERS]
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2007-02-28 17:28:33 Re: [HACKERS]