Guys,
Your idea of calling PostGIS a sort of fork seems a little odd. Isn't' that
like calling any GPL software you use within your database a fork. PostGIS
doesn't even do anything by itself.
On a side note -- I would like to say there are other reasons PostGIS is
not included in the PostgreSQL core besides the GPL license. We had
discussed this a while back and even if we were to go BSD, we would not want
to be included in the core because it would tie our release cycle too
closely to the PostgreSQL release cycle and our PostGIS versions to a
PostgreSQL specific version. As a community we like our freedom of
releasing when we feel it is necessary to do so without having to worry so
much about what the PostgreSQL side of the fence is doing. This may change
as we mature, but that's the way it stands.
Paul, Mark and Kevin can correct me if I am wrong in my statements.
Thanks,
Regina
-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-advocacy-owner@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-advocacy-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Devrim GÜNDÜZ
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 5:04 PM
To: Josh Berkus
Cc: pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] List of PostgreSQL Forks
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 13:58 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > Which license? Both parts are BSD licensed.
>
> Huh? PostGIS has always been GPL. Otherwise we'd be distributing it
> with the core code.
Right, sorry.
--
Devrim GÜNDÜZ, RHCE
Command Prompt - http://www.CommandPrompt.com devrim~gunduz.org,
devrim~PostgreSQL.org, devrim.gunduz~linux.org.tr http://www.gunduz.org
Twitter: http://twitter.com/devrimgunduz
