Re: beta testing version - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

Regardless of what license is best, could the license even be changed now? I
mean, some of the initial Berkeley code is still in there in some sense and
I would think that the original license (BSD I assume) of the initial source
code release would have to be somehow honored.. I'm just wondering if the PG
team could change the license even if they wanted to.. I should go read the
license again, I know the answer to the above is in there but it's been a
long time since I've looked it over and I'm in the middle of packing, so I
haven't got the time right now.. Thanks to anyone for satisfying my
curiosity in answering this question.

I think that it's very, very good if the license is indeed untouchable, it
keeps PostgreSQL from becoming totally closed-source and/or totally
commercial.. Obviously things can be added to PG and sold commercially, but
there will always be the base PostgreSQL out there for everyone...... I
hope.

Just my $0.02 worth..

-Mitch


----- Original Message -----
From: "Lamar Owen" <lamar.owen@wgcr.org>
To: "PostgreSQL Development" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2000 1:45 PM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version


> The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> > its been brought up and rejected continuously ... in some of our
opinions,
> > GPL is more harmful then helpful ... as has been said before many times,
> > and I'm sure will continue to be said "changing the license to GPL is a
> > non-discussable issue" ...
>
> I've declined commenting on this thread until now -- but this statement
> bears amplification.
>
> GPL is NOT the be-all end-all Free Software (in the FSF/GNU sense!)
> license.  There is room for more than one license -- just as there is
> room for more than one OS, more than one Unix, more than one Free RDBMS,
> more than one Free webserver, more than one scripting language, more
> than one compiler system, more than one Linux distribution, more than
> one BSD, and more than one CPU architecture.
>
> Why make a square peg development group fit a round peg license? :-)
> Use a round peg for round holes, and a square peg for square holes.
>
> Choice of license for PostgreSQL is not negotiable. I don't say that as
> an edict from Lamar Owen (after all, I am in no position to edict
> anything :-)) -- I say that as a studied observation of the last times
> this subject has come up.
>
> I personally prefer GPL.  But my personal preference and what is good
> for the project are two different things. BSD is good for this project
> with this group of developers -- and it should not change.
>
> And, like any other open development effort, there will be missteps --
> which missteps should, IMHO, be put behind us.  No software is perfect;
> no development team is, either.
> --
> Lamar Owen
> WGCR Internet Radio
> 1 Peter 4:11
>