Re: Patent warning about the Greenplum source code

On 3 November 2015 at 08:12, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:

> I am posting this at the request of Josh Berkus, who wanted
> clarification on some issues. FYI, I have been speaking in this thread
> as a community member, and not as a member of core, and made some
> mistakes in my handling of this --- my apologies.
>

Thank you, apology accepted.

> The crux of my concern is that a patent in close-source software is
> barely visible --- it might be mentioned in marketing material or
> documentation, but that is unlikely. When something is released as open
> source, by definition, the patented idea is visible in that code. In a
> strange twist of fate, open source actually allows more chances for
> seeing patented ideas than closed source.

I agree with this.

> I should have made this clear
> in my initial post, and there is nothing Greenplum-specific about any of
> this.

Good. Now we have addressed the issue of balance, the fundamental issue
raised in your original post is still important and does need to be
addressed, against any and all companies/patents.

Your vigilance on patent issues is useful. Thank you very much.

--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
<http://www.2ndquadrant.com/>
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services