RE: User locks code
От | Mikheev, Vadim |
---|---|
Тема | RE: User locks code |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3705826352029646A3E91C53F7189E3201674F@sectorbase2.sectorbase.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | User locks code ("Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM>) |
Ответы |
Re: User locks code
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> > > I assume any code that uses contrib/userlock has to be GPL'ed, > > > meaning it can be used for commercial purposes but can't be sold > > > as binary-only, and actually can't be sold for much because you > > > have to make the code available for near-zero cost. > > > > I'm talking not about solding contrib/userlock separately, but > > about ability to sold applications which use contrib/userlock. > > Sorry, if it was not clear. > > No, you were clear. So I missed your "near-zero cost" sentence. > My assumption is that once you link that code into > the backend, the entire backend is GPL'ed and any other > application code you link into it is also (stored procedures, > triggers, etc.) I don't think your client application will > be GPL'ed, assuming you didn't link in libreadline. Application would explicitly call user_lock() functions in queries, so issue is still not clear for me. And once again - compare complexities of contrib/userlock and backend' userlock code: what's reason to cover contrib/userlock by GPL? Vadim
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: