Re: [GENERAL] pg_filedump binary for CentOS

Greg Stark wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.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.

I think we should just link to the tool from our docs so there is no
license complexity.  Where do we add it?

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + It's impossible for everything to be true. +