On 8/12/15 9:32 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
>> * Michael Paquier (michael.paquier@gmail.com) wrote:
>>> Interesting. Do you mind if I pick up from it some ideas for the
>>> in-core replication test suite based on TAP stuff? That's still in the
>>> works for the next CF.
>>
>> Certainly don't mind at all, entirely open source under the MIT
>> license.
>
> Why not the PG license? It would be nicer if we didn't have to worry
> about license contamination here.
There are actually a few reasons I chose the MIT license:
1) It's one of the most permissive licenses around.
2) I originally had plans to extend backrest to other database systems. Nearly two years into development I don't
thinkthat sounds like a
great idea anymore but it was the original plan.
3) It's common for GitHub projects and backrest has lived there its
entire life.
I'm not against a license change in theory though I can't see why it
matters very much.
--
-David
david@pgmasters.net
