On Thu, 2008-12-18 at 00:00 -0500, Emmanuel Cecchet wrote:
> > At the moment, all you've done is show examples of how Oracle does
> > partitioning and restate my requirements document, significant chunks
> > completely verbatim. If you do that I think it fair to ask for a
> > specific credit on that. But even so, thank you for the compliment.
> >
> It was not my intention to steal your work but to put together
> everything that was produced so far. I tried to put in the links
> section, references to all documents I have consulted so far. I thought
> this was a collective work and therefore did not ask for specific credit
> for everyone that participated on the mailing list. As you can also
> notice, I did not claim any credit nor put my name on the wiki page. I
> am just trying to help the community.
Approximately 50% of the Wiki entry is *exactly* the same as the
document I wrote. Yes, the Wiki may one day become a collective work,
but currently the following Wiki entry is fairly obviously not a
collective work.
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Table_partitioning
I think asking that you give credit in these circumstances was and is
fair and reasonable.
Your attitude to this is quite remarkable and worrying. I have checked
the source code examples you have used also and Google says these come
directly from copyrighted Oracle documentation. You haven't even changed
the names of datatypes to PostgreSQL ones.
http://download-east.oracle.com/docs/cd/B13789_01/server.101/b10736/parpart.htm
I strongly doubt you will be able to persuade Oracle that the PostgreSQL
Wiki is a "collective work" and that they deserve no credit for their
*copyrighted* work.
I personally doubt whether we need Oracle's old ideas, but the
PostgreSQL project definitely has no need for parts of their manuals.
Please remove the copyrighted material immediately from the Wiki.
-- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
