| From: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, David Boreham <david_list(at)boreham(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] pg_filedump binary for CentOS |
| Date: | 2010-10-15 06:36:30 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTinu6qQPXzn8C7SLJ_WYd9Rnsbbz3ojhGotpT4=P@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
>> Should we consider moving pg_filedump into our /contrib?
>
> Can't: it's GPL.
>
I don't particularly see a problem with having GPL'd contrib modules.
It would mean any users hoping to redistribute the package couldn't
include those modules except under the GPL. But most repackagers don't
include the contrib modules anyways. Even ones that do and want to
include those modules would only have to include the source to that
module.
I can see not wanting to let that camel's nose in for fear of having
packagers always be uncertain about the status of each contrib module
though.
--
greg
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nick | 2010-10-15 06:55:08 | Re: It it possible to get this result in one query? |
| Previous Message | David Fetter | 2010-10-15 06:02:46 | Re: [GENERAL] pg_filedump binary for CentOS |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Radosław Smogura | 2010-10-15 06:56:21 | Re: [JDBC] Support for JDBC setQueryTimeout, et al. |
| Previous Message | Jaime Casanova | 2010-10-15 06:03:36 | Re: How to reliably detect if it's a promoting standby |