Re: contrib and licensing
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: contrib and licensing |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20968.1049673506@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: contrib and licensing (Kevin Brown <kevin@sysexperts.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: contrib and licensing
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Kevin Brown <kevin@sysexperts.com> writes: > But if both of these paragraphs are simultaneously true, then why put > *anything* in contrib? Don't say that too loudly, or Marc may take it upon himself to make it happen ;-). There are a number of reasons to keep things in contrib. One is that the code may be too tightly tied to backend innards to be appropriate to maintain separately (the GIST extension modules are a good example, and most of the modules that include server-side code are easier to maintain with the server than not). Another is that small modules may not have enough critical mass to get maintained at all, if they're kicked out to live or die on their own. > Otherwise, perhaps you're more concerned about the licensing issues in > contrib than you need to be? The way I see it, the "only BSD stuff in contrib" rule is designed precisely to save us from having to think too hard about licensing issues. I'm not interested in getting into lawyeristic arguments about how it's okay to distribute something with a different license if only we don't do XYZ with it. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: