Re: [HACKERS] Another source of snprintf/vsnprintf code

Todd Graham Lewis <tlewis@mindspring.net> writes:
> I assume LGPL is license non grata?

Probably.  I'm not sure what Marc's position is, but I'd say we ought
to try to keep everything under a single set of license rules --- and
for better or worse, BSD license is what we have for the existing code.
If we distribute a system that has some BSD and some LGPL code, then
users have to follow *both* sets of rules if they want to live a clean
life, and that gets annoying.  (Also, LGPL is more restrictive about
what recipients can do with the code, which might mean some potential
Postgres users couldn't use it anymore.)

> glib has a good *printf* implementation...

Stephen Kogge <stevek@uimage.com> was looking at extracting printf
from glib (because his platform's printf didn't handle long long),
but I think he concluded that it wasn't practical to separate it
from the rest of glib --- seems everything's connected to everything
else...
        regards, tom lane