Re: [GENERAL] pg_filedump binary for CentOS
От | Greg Stark |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [GENERAL] pg_filedump binary for CentOS |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTinu6qQPXzn8C7SLJ_WYd9Rnsbbz3ojhGotpT4=P@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [GENERAL] pg_filedump binary for CentOS (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [GENERAL] pg_filedump binary for CentOS
Re: [GENERAL] pg_filedump binary for CentOS Re: [GENERAL] pg_filedump binary for CentOS |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
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. -- greg
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: