Hi,
On 2018-07-07 19:12:58 +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 01:15:15AM +0000, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
> > I believe that accepting patented code from companies would be
> > practically more useful for PostgreSQL enhancement and growth.
> > PostgreSQL is now a mature software, and it can be more
> > corporate-friendly like other software under Apache License.
>
> The Apache license is "friendly" to the patent holder, not so much to
> the aspiring maker of derivative proprietary software.
I don't think that's a true characterization. There's no meaningful
reduction in freedoms to make derivative proprietary software in of
apache 2 vs BSD/MIT like licenses. It gives you additional rights. Are
you talking about the retaliatory clause? If so, that only cancel the
patent license, not the entire license.
> We went with a very liberal license from the outset for what we
> believed were good reasons, and that's served us well over the
> decades. If you're proposing a change of this magnitude, it's going
> to have to be a lot more convincing than, "it would be convenient for
> my company this year."
It's entirely possible to dual license contributions and everything. Why
are you making such aggressive statements about a, so far, apparently
good faith engagement?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
