Thread: change to interfaces.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
add odbcng
fixed odbc url
fixed tcl url
added open office sdbc driver
- --
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/
UNIQUE NOT NULL
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFHPJVHATb/zqfZUUQRAnOBAJ9tyfDy/bUQDpPkzu1fd9OCqd70AgCfZbjO
mL0rUl6GzgNdEyl6t0lZdPs=
=LoTw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Attachment
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > add odbcng > fixed odbc url > fixed tcl url > added open office sdbc driver Checking before I change... 1) I'd like to put the odbcng driver below the one that's there now. 2) I'd like to remove the "from commandprompt inc" part. No other interfaces list where they're from. Are you fine with these changes? //Magnus
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 20:24:58 +0100
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > add odbcng
> > fixed odbc url
> > fixed tcl url
> > added open office sdbc driver
>
> Checking before I change...
>
> 1) I'd like to put the odbcng driver below the one that's there now.
>
> 2) I'd like to remove the "from commandprompt inc" part. No other
> interfaces list where they're from.
>
> Are you fine with these changes?
Sure :) I was just trying to be alphabetical which is why i put ODBCng
first (versus pgODBC).
Joshua D. Drake
- --
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ UNIQUE NOT NULL
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFHPJ2qATb/zqfZUUQRAj2pAJ0dYN7Ujiki2nSAh7LvKzgs2PKdHQCgmKd/
W+plL5y7EKyDiLoKMSPDd0A=
=5leq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > add odbcng > fixed odbc url > fixed tcl url > added open office sdbc driver Modified version applied, thanks. //Magnus
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - --On Thursday, November 15, 2007 11:27:38 -0800 "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 20:24:58 +0100 > Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > >> Joshua D. Drake wrote: >> > add odbcng >> > fixed odbc url >> > fixed tcl url >> > added open office sdbc driver >> >> Checking before I change... >> >> 1) I'd like to put the odbcng driver below the one that's there now. >> >> 2) I'd like to remove the "from commandprompt inc" part. No other >> interfaces list where they're from. >> >> Are you fine with these changes? > > Sure :) I was just trying to be alphabetical which is why i put ODBCng > first (versus pgODBC). That makes sense .. some sort of logical order would make it easier to find things ... - ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFHPOvR4QvfyHIvDvMRAqYNAJ92N0rz5wnWgn5IFyKAd+FrtT64WQCgrAcP mRjBYyB1EBahs8Fwgiy4UV0= =Aka5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Marc G. Fournier wrote: >> Sure :) I was just trying to be alphabetical which is why i put ODBCng >> first (versus pgODBC). > > That makes sense .. some sort of logical order would make it easier to find > things ... Except it then looks like we prefer the Command Prompt code over the community code. /D
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - --On Friday, November 16, 2007 08:51:54 +0000 Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org> wrote: > Marc G. Fournier wrote: >>> Sure :) I was just trying to be alphabetical which is why i put ODBCng >>> first (versus pgODBC). >> >> That makes sense .. some sort of logical order would make it easier to find >> things ... > > Except it then looks like we prefer the Command Prompt code over the > community code. No, then it looks like its in alphabetical order ... *now* it looks like we prefer one over the other, since there is no order to it ... - ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFHPV2T4QvfyHIvDvMRAgtDAJ9WLhT/EKWbO7Zq3qe3kBm8ghGagACcD0/4 doCzjH9IvUf+J+QELYPeaao= =GeQk -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > > - --On Friday, November 16, 2007 08:51:54 +0000 Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org> > wrote: > >> Marc G. Fournier wrote: >>>> Sure :) I was just trying to be alphabetical which is why i put ODBCng >>>> first (versus pgODBC). >>> That makes sense .. some sort of logical order would make it easier to find >>> things ... >> Except it then looks like we prefer the Command Prompt code over the >> community code. > > No, then it looks like its in alphabetical order ... *now* it looks like we > prefer one over the other, since there is no order to it ... We do - we prefer the community code over the one produced and maintained by a single company, and released under a licence that is potentially very restrictive (depending on the interpretation which has yet to be tested in court afaik). /D
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - --On Friday, November 16, 2007 09:16:54 +0000 Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org> wrote: > Marc G. Fournier wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> >> >> - --On Friday, November 16, 2007 08:51:54 +0000 Dave Page >> <dpage@postgresql.org> wrote: >> >>> Marc G. Fournier wrote: >>>>> Sure :) I was just trying to be alphabetical which is why i put ODBCng >>>>> first (versus pgODBC). >>>> That makes sense .. some sort of logical order would make it easier to find >>>> things ... >>> Except it then looks like we prefer the Command Prompt code over the >>> community code. >> >> No, then it looks like its in alphabetical order ... *now* it looks like we >> prefer one over the other, since there is no order to it ... > > We do - we prefer the community code over the one produced and maintained by > a single company, and released under a licence that is potentially very > restrictive (depending on the interpretation which has yet to be tested in > court afaik). Then that should be stated on the page to avoid confusion,w hat the ordering is based on ... - ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFHPWNh4QvfyHIvDvMRAldpAJ0XzkUv25mLdGL1cJ0v8aWhVSUO6ACcDVKf C7Vc7neUZfblTpe8J81GiJo= =vU7o -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Dave Page wrote: > Marc G. Fournier wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 > We do - we prefer the community code over the one produced and > maintained by a single company, and released under a licence that is > potentially very restrictive (depending on the interpretation which has > yet to be tested in court afaik). Uhmmm o.k. now I am ticked. Dave you are full of it on this one. The license chosen is one the most trusted Open Source licenses in existed. It is the GPL for god sake. And although we are the primary developers of ODBCng we do accept patches, the source can be downloaded via Anonymous SVN. There is no different between ODBC and ODBCng except your ridiculous and ignorant attitude. The real difference between ODBCng and ODBC is that ODBCng is continually tested, continually developed, and continually improved. Or is that the part that bothers you? Joshua D. Drake > > /D > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings >
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 >>> No, then it looks like its in alphabetical order ... *now* it looks like we >>> prefer one over the other, since there is no order to it ... >> We do - we prefer the community code over the one produced and maintained by >> a single company, and released under a licence that is potentially very >> restrictive (depending on the interpretation which has yet to be tested in >> court afaik). > > Then that should be stated on the page to avoid confusion,w hat the ordering is > based on ... ODBCng is community code. Joshua D. Drake > > - ---- > Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) > Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org > Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) > > iD8DBQFHPWNh4QvfyHIvDvMRAldpAJ0XzkUv25mLdGL1cJ0v8aWhVSUO6ACcDVKf > C7Vc7neUZfblTpe8J81GiJo= > =vU7o > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Dave Page wrote: >> Marc G. Fournier wrote: > >> We do - we prefer the community code over the one produced and >> maintained by a single company, and released under a licence that is >> potentially very restrictive (depending on the interpretation which >> has yet to be tested in court afaik). > > Uhmmm o.k. now I am ticked. Dave you are full of it on this one. The > license chosen is one the most trusted Open Source licenses in existed. > It is the GPL for god sake. I believe Dave is referring to the part about if the "linking" of a driver counts enough to force the application to become GPL or not that hasn't been tested. LGPL conveniently gets around that problem. > And although we are the primary developers of ODBCng we do accept > patches, the source can be downloaded via Anonymous SVN. > > There is no different between ODBC and ODBCng except your ridiculous and > ignorant attitude. > > The real difference between ODBCng and ODBC is that ODBCng is > continually tested, continually developed, and continually improved. Or > is that the part that bothers you? From what I can tell, psqlODBC is also continually developed, though maybe at a different speed. But just looking at the repositories shows latest commit to psqlODBC 12 days ago, and ODBCng 2 months ago... Goes to show you can twist that reasoning either way. But, just for the record. I put psqlODBC on top for three reasons. First, it's claimed to be the official driver. If it should claim to be that or not is a different discussion, that's how it is now, and that's what the page should reflect. Second, the psqlODBC driver is more feature-complete, so it will fit more peoples requirements. ODBCng doesn't support advanced authentication methods. It doesn't support versions < 8.0. Last I checked it didn't support SSL, but maybe that's been fixed? Third, ODBCng is not a production release (according to your own page, I make no statement to the code itself, since I haven't looked at it) //Magnus
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Dave Page wrote: >> Marc G. Fournier wrote: >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>> Hash: SHA1 > >> We do - we prefer the community code over the one produced and >> maintained by a single company, and released under a licence that is >> potentially very restrictive (depending on the interpretation which >> has yet to be tested in court afaik). > > Uhmmm o.k. now I am ticked. Dave you are full of it on this one. The > license chosen is one the most trusted Open Source licenses in existed. > It is the GPL for god sake. Yes, which is a constant cause of debate when used with a driver, for example: - The discussions that have cropped up yet again a week or two back on the ODBC mailing list. - The general Open Source community's annoyance at MySQL GPL'ing their drivers precisely because they want people to pay for the non-GPL licence. > And although we are the primary developers of ODBCng we do accept > patches, the source can be downloaded via Anonymous SVN. I didn't say you didn't. > There is no different between ODBC and ODBCng except your ridiculous and > ignorant attitude. You are expecting the PostgreSQL Community to not favour it's own driver on it's own website over one maintained by a third party company? Thats not at all ridiculous. I can just imagine what you would say if I tried to push an EDB product over an community one *on the community website*. > The real difference between ODBCng and ODBC is that ODBCng is > continually tested, continually developed, and continually improved. Or > is that the part that bothers you? > Not at all. Hiroshi Saito and Hiroshi Inoue have been doing an excellent job on psqlODBC over the last year or more. /D
Magnus Hagander wrote: > Joshua D. Drake wrote: > I believe Dave is referring to the part about if the "linking" of a > driver counts enough to force the application to become GPL or not that > hasn't been tested. LGPL conveniently gets around that problem. As opposed to a license that is licensed by an entity that doesn't exist? It is *not* the projects responsibility to declare the legality of licensing. The driver *is* open source. The driver *is* available via SVN. The driver *is* publicly developed, and anyone can comment or contribute. > > But, just for the record. I put psqlODBC on top for three reasons. > First, it's claimed to be the official driver. If it should claim to be Which is also bogus and a deprecated claim. Dave himself has stated that PostgreSQL.Org has no ability to declare what is official. (When we announced PostgreSQL conference) Further if it is the "official" driver, then it has a huge amount of code cleanup that needs to be done. (not that ours is any better :P) > more peoples requirements. ODBCng doesn't support advanced > authentication methods. That is correct, we only support the ones most people use. > It doesn't support versions < 8.0. Last I That is also correct but I hardly consider whether or not we support ungodly old versions of PostgreSQL relevant. > checked it didn't support SSL, but maybe that's been fixed? > Oddly enough, I don't know. I would have to ask Andrei. > Third, ODBCng is not a production release (according to your own page, I Declaring something production and having it actually be production quality are two different things. If you are saying that I would move up the meter by saying, "Here here is 1.0" then I guess I could do that. Honestly, I don't care that ODBCng is listed below psqlODBC. If I had cared I would have asked you not to accept the patch when you made the changes. That is not why I am upset. I am upset because of the absolutely stupid remark that it is not community code. I will say it one more time for the cheap seats: Just because a company does the primary development that does not mean it is not community code. Command Prompt is "core" on the ODBCng project. Nothing more. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake
Dave Page wrote: > Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Yes, which is a constant cause of debate when used with a driver, for > example: > > - The discussions that have cropped up yet again a week or two back on > the ODBC mailing list. We are not attorneys. It is under what is probably the most prevalent FOSS license. > > - The general Open Source community's annoyance at MySQL GPL'ing their > drivers precisely because they want people to pay for the non-GPL licence. Uhh, how does that have *anything* to do with this? This isn't MySQL. And guess what... MySQL has every right to do with what they want with their code. It is no the communities business regardless of what all of us dirty hippies would like think. > >> There is no different between ODBC and ODBCng except your ridiculous >> and ignorant attitude. > > You are expecting the PostgreSQL Community to not favour it's own driver > on it's own website over one maintained by a third party company? Thats > not at all ridiculous. Uhh... no. I never said that and you should know better. However, Alphabetical order is not favoritism. Putting it in bold and saying "Hey this is the Command Prompt driver", would be favoritism. > > I can just imagine what you would say if I tried to push an EDB product > over an community one *on the community website*. > If it was just an alphabetical listing of "OPEN SOURCE" software, then I would not have a problem with it. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Just because a company does the primary development that does not mean > it is not community code. Command Prompt is "core" on the ODBCng > project. Nothing more. Then you and I clearly have a different definition of 'community'. I use the word to mean a project that is run under the community banner, e.g. postgresql.org or pgfoundry.org or some other public open source project site, and more importantly, is not likely to be mistaken as a poduct of a commercial entity. In this case the website is well and truly CP branded, clearly labelled as commercially supported by you, and on a site which doesn't seem to want to let me register as a contributor, and doesn't give me any clues about where I should submit a patch, except possibly the mailing list - but that doesn't say whether it's a developers list, announce list or what :-( I don't even seem to be able to log a ticket - there's no email address I can see, nor is there an obvious 'Log a Ticket' link anywhere. My only option seems to be the company providing commercial support, or the big yellow 'Contact Us' button. Oh, hang on... Regards, Dave
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > If it was just an alphabetical listing of "OPEN SOURCE" software, then I > would not have a problem with it. Well, there's the problem. It wasn't alphabetical to begin with anyway. /D
I'd prefer we not get into a flamewar over this, all, but I'm a little concerned about this: On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 03:57:57PM +0000, Dave Page wrote: > - The general Open Source community's annoyance at MySQL GPL'ing their > drivers precisely because they want people to pay for the non-GPL licence. I think the complaint there is the dual licence stuff, and not the GPL as such (at least, I'd hope so, since otherwise there'd be a similar objection to the linux kernel licence, and there doesn't seem to be). I don't see on the ODBCng pages any suggestion of a second licence. Is there? A -- Andrew Sullivan Old sigs will return after re-constitution of blue smoke
Andrew Sullivan wrote: > I'd prefer we not get into a flamewar over this, all, but I'm a little > concerned about this: > > On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 03:57:57PM +0000, Dave Page wrote: >> - The general Open Source community's annoyance at MySQL GPL'ing their >> drivers precisely because they want people to pay for the non-GPL licence. > > I think the complaint there is the dual licence stuff, and not the GPL as > such (at least, I'd hope so, since otherwise there'd be a similar objection > to the linux kernel licence, and there doesn't seem to be). I don't see on > the ODBCng pages any suggestion of a second licence. Is there? No - I was pointing out that MySQL are an example of a company using the uncertainty of how the GPL would or would not apply to an ODBC driver to help them sell software. I should make it clear that I do not believe that is JD/Command Prompt's intention - JD has stated a number of times that they follow the more liberal interpretation. /D
Dave Page wrote: > Joshua D. Drake wrote: >> Just because a company does the primary development that does not mean >> it is not community code. Command Prompt is "core" on the ODBCng >> project. Nothing more. > > Then you and I clearly have a different definition of 'community'. I use > the word to mean a project that is run under the community banner, e.g. > postgresql.org or pgfoundry.org or some other public open source project > site, and more importantly, is not likely to be mistaken as a poduct of > a commercial entity. O.k. well then I just say "bah". Your definition is the same as mine. Just because I have ".com" after my domain means nothing. > > In this case the website is well and truly CP branded, PostgreSQL.org is branded as well and *no* there is no difference. > clearly labelled > as commercially supported by you, You are using it as a negative that open source software is commercially supported? > about where I should submit a patch, except possibly the mailing list - > but that doesn't say whether it's a developers list, announce list or > what :-( So your real complaint is that we didn't spend more time on the website and instead chose to keep it bare? O.k. well if you look at the the website again (and for those following the thread): http://projects.commandprompt.com/public/odbcng Notice the use of the word "projects" and "public" and perhaps the large declaratory announcement on the front page that it is GPL (and thus open source). We have also made it more explicit that we invite people to join the development. > > I don't even seem to be able to log a ticket - there's no email address > I can see, nor is there an obvious 'Log a Ticket' link anywhere. > Mailing list. > My only option seems to be the company providing commercial support, or > the big yellow 'Contact Us' button. Oh, hang on... > Again, ignoring the mailing list right there on the front page in black and white. I have updated the website to make it more obvious because although Dave is obviously got a bias here, he had a valid point that we could have been more obvious on how to participate. We have tried to make it more clear now and I hope that this resolves any further disputes. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake
Andrew Sullivan wrote: > I'd prefer we not get into a flamewar over this, all, but I'm a little > concerned about this: > > On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 03:57:57PM +0000, Dave Page wrote: >> - The general Open Source community's annoyance at MySQL GPL'ing their >> drivers precisely because they want people to pay for the non-GPL licence. > > I think the complaint there is the dual licence stuff, and not the GPL as > such (at least, I'd hope so, since otherwise there'd be a similar objection > to the linux kernel licence, and there doesn't seem to be). I don't see on > the ODBCng pages any suggestion of a second licence. Is there? No. Joshua D. Drake > > A >
On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 04:42:33PM +0000, Dave Page wrote: > No - I was pointing out that MySQL are an example of a company using the > uncertainty of how the GPL would or would not apply to an ODBC driver to > help them sell software. Perhaps in future we can all avoid dragging dual-licencing schemes into these sorts of discussions, then, since they're rather a different issue than GPL-vs-BSD arguments (which don't belong on -www anyway, ISTM). > I should make it clear that I do not believe that is JD/Command Prompt's > intention - JD has stated a number of times that they follow the more > liberal interpretation. So what exactly is this argument about, then? A -- Andrew Sullivan Old sigs will return after re-constitution of blue smoke
Andrew Sullivan wrote: >> I should make it clear that I do not believe that is JD/Command Prompt's >> intention - JD has stated a number of times that they follow the more >> liberal interpretation. > > So what exactly is this argument about, then? The reason why (imho) psqlODBC should be listed more prominently on the website than the CommandPrompt driver. Licencing came into it because I pointed out there is confusion over the appropriateness of the GPL for an ODBC driver due to the way the linking/runtime loading happens. /D
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - --On Friday, November 16, 2007 07:40:25 -0800 "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote: > Uhmmm o.k. now I am ticked. Dave you are full of it on this one. The license > chosen is one the most trusted Open Source licenses in existed. It is the GPL > for god sake. Well, "most trusted" could be argued, especially with the recent incarnation :) But, it *is* a very restrictive license ... I would take a BSD licensed product over a GPL one, *but*, I don't believe that *that* should be criteria for ordering ... But, maybe the license for the driver should be included on that page, for those that do have a preference ... ODBCng (GPL) pgODBC (BSD) - ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFHPdL24QvfyHIvDvMRAhxgAKCpwv7Ho0gb2w+d3xS7i5SEL9Y8awCfUkDu Woaeq7XmHYWTxUAF6d0Eiu4= =ti1F -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - --On Friday, November 16, 2007 15:57:57 +0000 Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org> wrote: > - The general Open Source community's annoyance at MySQL GPL'ing their > drivers precisely because they want people to pay for the non-GPL licence. Isn't MySQLs Dual-Licensed, for that reason? I don't believe CMDs is Dual-Licensed, is it? Does CMD *have* a 'commercial version' of their ODBC driver that has more features? - ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFHPdOx4QvfyHIvDvMRAvdXAJ9VwdIL+RvxjqISeUAwQRJpiJkd/wCaAsDk Bo2XNsLmbJz2BybSFnfIW5g= =o5b9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - --On Friday, November 16, 2007 08:02:48 -0800 "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote: >> more peoples requirements. ODBCng doesn't support advanced >> authentication methods. > > That is correct, we only support the ones most people use. 'k, now you are losing me on the argument ... >> It doesn't support versions < 8.0. Last I > > That is also correct but I hardly consider whether or not we support ungodly > old versions of PostgreSQL relevant. ... as does this one, considering we officially support v7.3 and newer, the ODBC driver we push should reflect that ... > Just because a company does the primary development that does not mean it is > not community code. Command Prompt is "core" on the ODBCng project. Nothing > more. These arguments I do agree with ... maybe some sort of 'feature matrix' is needed where we're dealing with multiple versions ... have an ODBC.html page and allow other 'versions' of ODBC include their products, commercial and open source ... 'k, let me ask though ... why would i use ODBCng over pgODBC? From your own words, the code is a mess (just like pgODBC), it doesn't support advanced auth methods (which ones aren't supported?) and doesn't support older versions of Pg (I have several clients still using 7.2, actually, for older OpenACS sites, and *alot* using 7.4) ... - ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFHPdVR4QvfyHIvDvMRAvjnAKCAKiXN81SLRPlGEEsGQ2uXelnY1ACffLkm XPDfQu0vO9iTKxMPq0GHYKY= =3wH2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > > - --On Friday, November 16, 2007 15:57:57 +0000 Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org> > wrote: > >> - The general Open Source community's annoyance at MySQL GPL'ing their >> drivers precisely because they want people to pay for the non-GPL licence. > > Isn't MySQLs Dual-Licensed, for that reason? I don't believe CMDs is > Dual-Licensed, is it? Does CMD *have* a 'commercial version' of their ODBC > driver that has more features? No, and I didn't mean to imply it does. I believe CP are at the other end of the scale from MySQL - MySQL are taking the restrictive stance, whilst CP are taking the liberal stance. It's the fact that the licence allows those different interpretations that I believe is a serious problem. /D
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 13:30:25 -0400 "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > > - --On Friday, November 16, 2007 15:57:57 +0000 Dave Page > <dpage@postgresql.org> wrote: > > > - The general Open Source community's annoyance at MySQL GPL'ing > > their drivers precisely because they want people to pay for the > > non-GPL licence. > > Isn't MySQLs Dual-Licensed, for that reason? I don't believe CMDs is > Dual-Licensed, is it? Does CMD *have* a 'commercial version' of > their ODBC driver that has more features? Directly from the website: * ODBCng is a written from scratch ODBC driver for PostgreSQL 8.x+. We will not be supporting the 7.x version of PostgreSQL. * ODBCng is a wire-level ODBC driver meaning that we do not require libpq or any PostgreSQL libraries be installed to function. * ODBCng is commercially supported by The PostgreSQL Company, Command Prompt, Inc., Although we invite community members to do the same. * ODBCng is licensed under the GPL. We do not sell one off proprietary licenses. * If you would like to contribute please join the public mailing lists here: http://lists.commandprompt.com/mailman/listinfo/odbcng . This list is a low volume list but can be used for technical discussion, patch submission, and general help. * Sources are here (anonymous svn): http://projects.commandprompt.com/public/odbcng/repo * We are now in public test mode for the Win32 and Linux versions to resolve as many bugs as possible. > > > - ---- > Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services > (http://www.hub.org) Email . > scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org > Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) > > iD8DBQFHPdOx4QvfyHIvDvMRAvdXAJ9VwdIL+RvxjqISeUAwQRJpiJkd/wCaAsDk > Bo2XNsLmbJz2BybSFnfIW5g= > =o5b9 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > ---------------------------(end of > broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our > extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq > - -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ UNIQUE NOT NULL Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHPdbUATb/zqfZUUQRAockAKCcmeAJhEbIBZEAZE5XTu61FjC+5wCfYcxe piWwOhyYXqYf/qKcupk3tpk= =Q3hn -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - --On Friday, November 16, 2007 17:39:35 +0000 Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org> wrote: > Marc G. Fournier wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> >> >> - --On Friday, November 16, 2007 15:57:57 +0000 Dave Page >> <dpage@postgresql.org> wrote: >> >>> - The general Open Source community's annoyance at MySQL GPL'ing their >>> drivers precisely because they want people to pay for the non-GPL licence. >> >> Isn't MySQLs Dual-Licensed, for that reason? I don't believe CMDs is >> Dual-Licensed, is it? Does CMD *have* a 'commercial version' of their ODBC >> driver that has more features? > > No, and I didn't mean to imply it does. I believe CP are at the other end of > the scale from MySQL - MySQL are taking the restrictive stance, whilst CP are > taking the liberal stance. > > It's the fact that the licence allows those different interpretations that I > believe is a serious problem. Then the different licence schemes choosen for the product should be listed on the page, so that ppl can choose, but the product should still be alphabetically ordered .. just because *you* (and I) would choose a BSD licensed product over a GPL licensed one, it shouldn't be up to us to force that on others ... - ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFHPdho4QvfyHIvDvMRAgtvAKCEWistVneQj+Z+h9zT73/XIL6bnACfYXVN XuSHRfwq8Xk+ActYRjn+Ieg= =JuGs -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 13:37:21 -0400
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> wrote:
> > Just because a company does the primary development that does not
> > mean it is not community code. Command Prompt is "core" on the
> > ODBCng project. Nothing more.
>
> These arguments I do agree with ... maybe some sort of 'feature
> matrix' is needed where we're dealing with multiple versions ... have
> an ODBC.html page and allow other 'versions' of ODBC include their
> products, commercial and open source ...
To be clear (again).
I do not care that ODBCng is placed under psqlODBC. I do agree with
Marc's argument that Alphabetical would be better, but I really don't
care other than that.
What I do care about is the argument above. ODBCng "is" a community
project. What set me off, and what continues to raise my ire is the
obvious bias, ignorance and bigotry against an Open Source project that
is a community project, just because a company, which happens to be one
of the most prevalent supporters of the PostgreSQL community is the
primary developer.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
- --
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ UNIQUE NOT NULL
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFHPdlPATb/zqfZUUQRAlvxAJ9vKGy9gNFjBLB+xnLE2b19iXCrlQCeNwg+
pMemuAEJ2oSLyvIAOXeKt1g=
=snm4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----