Thread: PG Installer - Licensing Issues
As I understand it, I am allowed to redistribute Postgres so long as I include the copyright notice plus paragraphs as detailed on http://www.postgresql.org/about/licence/. What I want to confirm is that the one-click installer (which I understand was supplied by EnterpriseDB) can also be redistributed such that I can bundle Postgres with my "product", and also use the non-interactive installer (http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community/pginst-guide#interactive) such that I can make the installation as easy as possible for my users. I've scanned the EnterpriseDB site, but I see nothing that confirms or denies my thoughts. Anyone care to comment? Thanks Andrew
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:45:21AM +0100, Andrew Hastie wrote: > As I understand it, I am allowed to redistribute Postgres so long as > I include the copyright notice plus paragraphs as detailed on > http://www.postgresql.org/about/licence/. > > What I want to confirm is that the one-click installer (which I > understand was supplied by EnterpriseDB) can also be redistributed > such that I can bundle Postgres with my "product", and also use the > non-interactive installer (http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community/pginst-guide#interactive) > such that I can make the installation as easy as possible for my > users. I've scanned the EnterpriseDB site, but I see nothing that > confirms or denies my thoughts. I dug into this and found this at the top of the installation notes file that is created once you install the product, at /opt/PostgreSQL/9.1/doc/installation-notes.html: Legal Bits First the boring legal stuff. The software bundled together in this package is released under a number of different Open Source licences. By using any component of this installation package, you agree to abide by the terms and conditions of it's licence. The PostgreSQL Server and pgAdmin are released under the PostgreSQL License. This product includes software developed by the OpenSSL Project for use in the OpenSSL Toolkit. (http://www.openssl.org/) I also found this: http://www.enterprisedb.com/products-services-training/products-overview/licensing http://www.enterprisedb.com/ba/foss-licenses Now, this doesn't directly mention the installer, which is gone at the time this is installed. I know it has the same license as Postgres, but where is that documented. Dave, any ideas? -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:45:21AM +0100, Andrew Hastie wrote: >> As I understand it, I am allowed to redistribute Postgres so long as >> I include the copyright notice plus paragraphs as detailed on >> http://www.postgresql.org/about/licence/. >> >> What I want to confirm is that the one-click installer (which I >> understand was supplied by EnterpriseDB) can also be redistributed >> such that I can bundle Postgres with my "product", and also use the >> non-interactive installer (http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community/pginst-guide#interactive) >> such that I can make the installation as easy as possible for my >> users. I've scanned the EnterpriseDB site, but I see nothing that >> confirms or denies my thoughts. > > I dug into this and found this at the top of the installation notes file > that is created once you install the product, at > /opt/PostgreSQL/9.1/doc/installation-notes.html: > > Legal Bits > > First the boring legal stuff. The software bundled together in this > package is released under a number of different Open Source licences. > By using any component of this installation package, you agree to > abide by the terms and conditions of it's licence. > > The PostgreSQL Server and pgAdmin are released under the PostgreSQL > License. > > This product includes software developed by the OpenSSL Project for > use in the OpenSSL Toolkit. (http://www.openssl.org/) > > I also found this: > > http://www.enterprisedb.com/products-services-training/products-overview/licensing > http://www.enterprisedb.com/ba/foss-licenses > > Now, this doesn't directly mention the installer, which is gone at the > time this is installed. I know it has the same license as Postgres, but > where is that documented. Dave, any ideas? The installer code uses the PostgreSQL licence. I'll clarify the installation notes doc. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 03:20:52PM +0100, Dave Page wrote: > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:45:21AM +0100, Andrew Hastie wrote: > >> As I understand it, I am allowed to redistribute Postgres so long as > >> I include the copyright notice plus paragraphs as detailed on > >> http://www.postgresql.org/about/licence/. > >> > >> What I want to confirm is that the one-click installer (which I > >> understand was supplied by EnterpriseDB) can also be redistributed > >> such that I can bundle Postgres with my "product", and also use the > >> non-interactive installer (http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community/pginst-guide#interactive) > >> such that I can make the installation as easy as possible for my > >> users. I've scanned the EnterpriseDB site, but I see nothing that > >> confirms or denies my thoughts. > > > > I dug into this and found this at the top of the installation notes file > > that is created once you install the product, at > > /opt/PostgreSQL/9.1/doc/installation-notes.html: > > > > Legal Bits > > > > First the boring legal stuff. The software bundled together in this > > package is released under a number of different Open Source licences. > > By using any component of this installation package, you agree to > > abide by the terms and conditions of it's licence. > > > > The PostgreSQL Server and pgAdmin are released under the PostgreSQL > > License. > > > > This product includes software developed by the OpenSSL Project for > > use in the OpenSSL Toolkit. (http://www.openssl.org/) > > > > I also found this: > > > > http://www.enterprisedb.com/products-services-training/products-overview/licensing > > http://www.enterprisedb.com/ba/foss-licenses > > > > Now, this doesn't directly mention the installer, which is gone at the > > time this is installed. I know it has the same license as Postgres, but > > where is that documented. Dave, any ideas? > > The installer code uses the PostgreSQL licence. I'll clarify the > installation notes doc. Thanks. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
On 08/15/2012 06:45 PM, Andrew Hastie wrote: > As I understand it, I am allowed to redistribute Postgres so long as I > include the copyright notice plus paragraphs as detailed on > http://www.postgresql.org/about/licence/. > > What I want to confirm is that the one-click installer (which I > understand was supplied by EnterpriseDB) can also be redistributed such > that I can bundle Postgres with my "product", and also use the > non-interactive installer > (http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community/pginst-guide#interactive) > such that I can make the installation as easy as possible for my users. This is something I've wanted to raise for a while, and here's a chance. I'm concerned that the One-click installers are being (ab)used in 3rd party software, where they're often used to silently install and uninstall Pg with the default service account, service name, port, etc. That's a great way to stomp on any existing install the user has made themselves. I'm particularly concerned about silent uninstalls, though. The move to the generic service account will help, in that it'll get rid of the problems with people needing the password to the "postgres" account created by some silent installer. In an ideal world the installer would offer "branding" or similar, where it can be installed with a non-default port, non-default product ID in the registry, etc; generally sit side-by-side with the same version installed normally. I know that's a bunch of work though. Instead, is it worth mentioning where the (un)install is documented that users of the option should consider what happens when the user has already installed PostgreSQL themselves or as part of another product? And maybe offering advice on the correct use of the .zip binary packages as an alternative for bundling with an application? -- Craig Ringer
Thanks for your thoughts Craig, the issue with users having an existing PG installation is a definite concern. It sounds like you're recommending using the "ZIP Binaries", at least for MS Win installs, and configuring things manually rather than using the one-click installer. If so, are there any guidelines or samples you know of that I could make use of to help out here? As you say, there doesn't seem to be any formal documentation on how to do this from what I can see. Many thanks, Andrew
On 08/16/2012 06:46 PM, Andrew Hastie wrote: > Thanks for your thoughts Craig, the issue with users having an > existing PG installation is a definite concern. > > It sounds like you're recommending using the "ZIP Binaries", at least > for MS Win installs I wouldn't go as far as recommending. At this point it's something I want to raise for discussion here. Part of why I *wouldn't* necessarily recommend it is that there isn't much documentation on manual setup for Windows. Where to go from here will depend on what opinions turn out to be re using the unattended installer for in-app bundling. -- Craig Ringer