On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 10:34:10PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 10:31 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 10:12:14PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > I understand Postgres Pro had to invest resources to do the
> translation,
> > and understand their desire to restrict access. However, I think we
> > need to be clear on exactly what those restrictions are if we are
> going
> > to keep a link from our website.
> >
> > We are not. We are already linking, that part is taken care of. As a
> general
> > rule I think it'd be good if these things are clarified for visitors
> there
> > though, but that's independent of us linking to it.
>
> Really? We will link to documentation with any license? I was saying
> to _continue_ our linking, we should research this.
>
>
> Sorry, re-reading we're saying basically the same thing.
OK, good. I think we still need license clarification though. For
example, if I am maintaining servers for a company, and I read the
Postgres Pro docs, is that commercial use of the docs? I have no idea,
and I don't think users will either. I am not trying to be hard on
Postgres Pro, but I do think we need to know these answers so we can
decide.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
