Re: Complicated re-distribution of pgjdbc the "open source way"

Pavel>what is more important we could do the job _consistently_
Pavel>with a lot _less_ packagers effort.

I think "testing" is the key answer here to get consistent results.

Pavel>* the build would be 1-step process
Pavel> Any thoughts?

This all reminds me the 14 competing standards (see [1])
Do you mean "1-step" as in "1-cpu-instruction"?
Is "./build.sh" a "1-step"?

Pavel> even patches from us to support pure open source build are not wanted

I'm afraid this ^^ is misleading.

Patches are welcome provided they include tests to cover the change.
No tests -> no acceptance. It is in line with typical development
model, isn't it?

Pavel>_Open_ distribution¹
Pavel> By FOSS source I mean software which
Pavel>  _anybody_ can read, study, copy, modify, distribute

Can you tell us if org.osgi.enterprise complies with your definition
of "open distribution"?

Just in case you say "no", see [2] (download jar and note that sources
are in OSGI-OPT folder) for complete source code that is available
under Apache 2.0 license -> you can read, copy, modify and distribute
it with no problem.
Taking that into account, why do you think "org.osgi.enterprise" is
not "open distribution"?

1: https://xkcd.com/927/
2: http://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.osgi/org.osgi.enterprise/5.0.0

Vladimir