On Sun, Jan 05, 2020 at 05:46:48PM -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 5, 2020 at 5:39 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> Looking at the stats, it's clear that it took a lot of code from other
>> files, so it seems disingenuous to claim that it doesn't have even a
>> single line that isn't copyrighted by UCB regents.
>
> I took that claim at face value. Perhaps it was just an oversight.
> But if it really wasn't, then it's not just "portions" of the
> copyright that go to the PGDG.
>
>> I think the easiest is to state that all files, even new files are
>> Portions (c) each of these entities, period. Trying to distinguish code
>> that's not even a single line derived from UCB Regents seems really
>> labor-intensive.
>
> That seems like a reasonable policy to me, outside of third-party code
> that gets vendored into the tree. I am also in favor of being
> conservative about this.
That's also a no-brainer. So +1 to that. If we were to make that
more formal, could we add something in the docs in [1]? An idea could
be a new section dedicated to it.
[1]: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/12/source.html
--
Michael