On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
> Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> writes:
> > How different is the feature set?
> I was going to ask the same thing. If it's an exact replacement then
> OK, but I do not want to put up with non-Emacs-compatible keybindings,
> to mention just one likely issue.
> The whole thing really strikes me as make-work anyway. Linux is GPL'd;
> does anyone want to argue that we shouldn't run on Linux? Since we
> are not including libreadline in our distribution, there is NO reason
> to worry about using it when it's available. Wanting to find a
> replacement purely because of the license amounts to license bigotry,
Actually, IMHO, the pro to moving to libedit is that we could include it
as part of the distribution and make history a *standard* feature
... licensing started the thread, but I think its gone beyond that were we
have a way of providing an feature that is currently option as part of the
system as a whole ...
"one less package that you need to install" ...
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Alfred Perlstein||Date: 2000-12-29 23:51:41|
|Subject: Re: GNU readline and BSD license|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2000-12-29 23:43:38|
|Subject: Re: GNU readline and BSD license |