Re: contrib/pg_filedump - PostgreSQL File Dump Utility
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: contrib/pg_filedump - PostgreSQL File Dump Utility |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200202062306.g16N6nT10858@candle.pha.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: contrib/pg_filedump - PostgreSQL File Dump Utility (Patrick Macdonald <patrickm@redhat.com>) |
Список | pgsql-patches |
> > We'd prefer BSD, though. The existing contrib modules that are > > GPL-licensed snuck in there by virtue of people not paying attention. > > Understood and from a Steering Committee perspective it makes > sense to attempt to have all code associated with the project > under one license. > > However this contribution is part of another project, the Red Hat > Database Project, that uses GPL as its license. All tools and > utilities that we are developing including the Administrator, > Browser and Visual Explain will be issued under GPL (where possible). > > All work performed by the RHDB development team on PostgreSQL > proper falls under the existing PostgreSQL license(s). At first I thought this linked into the main PostgreSQL backend code, but actually it just reads tuple lengths, and optionally dumps out the data in hex. There doesn't seem to be any _smarts_ in reading the tuple information, so its linkage to the backend its limited to pg_crc.c. I don't see an issue with that linkage because if Patrick's code is GPL anyway, linking to a BSD file doesn't change the nature of GPL at all. I is only BSD linking to GPL code that changes the code to GPL. If it is already GPL, I don't see an issue. A larger issue is that this code wants to be in contrib. I don't see any other GPL code in contrib. I see pgcrypto using an LGPL library(?), and our odbc is LGPL'ed, and I can even find a mention of Peter Mount not including retepPDF because it was LGPL'ed. Now, I don't think it is an issue because retepPDF had other questionable issues Peter mentioned, but it does show that contributors have tried to be consistent with our current license. I guess I am concerned about going down the slippery slope where people have to scour the source tree and study every licensed piece. I know we have LGPL in our code. I don't know how different that is from the BSD license, and whether adding pure-GPL code into our tree is a wise move. Patrick, are the other projects you mentioned destined for our source tree too? --- Administrator, Browser and Visual Explain One unusual issue is that our python interface library is described as GPL-like. What does that mean? I don't see any actual license description. I am CC'ing the author. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: