On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 12:48 PM Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org> wrote:
> > Perhaps more importantly, *why* is it done? It seems to me that it
> > takes a pretty fevered imagination to suppose that using libreadline
>
> Tom, claiming that things are "fevered" just because you didn't like
> them is not appropriate. It's not fun working with PostgreSQL when the
> tone is like that.
+1.
> > that way meets the terms of its license but just building against
> > the library normally would not. Certainly when I worked for Red Hat,
> > their lawyers did not think there was any problem with building
> > Postgres using both openssl and readline.
>
> I'm not starting that debate here, but Debian thinks otherwise:
>
> https://lwn.net/Articles/428111/
I take no position on whether Debian is correct in its assessment of
such things, but I reiterate my previous opposition to breaking it
just because we don't agree with it, or because Tom specifically
doesn't. It's too mainstream a platform to arbitrarily break. And it
will probably just have the effect of increasing the number of patches
they're carrying against our sources, which will not make things
better for anybody.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
