Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
>> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 08:51:38AM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
>>>> Josh Berkus wrote:
>>>>> Dave, all:
>>> Also, looking back at the news just added today, is "EnterpriseDB
>>> Postgres"
>>> considered a "postgresql family product" or a commercial one? Maybe a
>>> guidance bullet on "downstream distributions"?
>>
>> It's certainly not commercial, but yes that does seem worth clarifying.
>
> It depends on what you are meaning by "commercial". This is a common
> problem amongst FOSS people. FOSS can be commercial. I would actually
> argue that EnterpriseDB Postgres *is* commercial as it is backed and
> supported by a *commercial* Enterprise.
>
> The real question is, "is it proprietary". If it is even partially
> closed source then it really doesn't belong in the "postgresql family
> product" unless we also include MPP and Replicator.
You know what I mean :-). And all of EDB-Postgres is open source,
including the funky little MySQL migrator tool in the latest builds.
/D
