> There is risk here. It isn't so much in the fact that PostgreSQL, Inc > is doing a couple of modest closed-source things with the code. After > all, the PG community has long acknowleged that the BSD license would > allow others to co-op the code and commercialize it with no obligations. > > It is rather sad to see PG, Inc. take the first step in this direction. > > How long until the entire code base gets co-opted? I totaly missed your point here. How closing source of ERserver is related to closing code of PostgreSQL DB server? Let me clear things: 1. ERserver isn't based on WAL. It will work with any version >= 6.5 2. WAL was partially sponsored by my employer, Sectorbase.com, not by PG, Inc. Vadim
- Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version Peter Eisentraut
- Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version Don Baccus
- Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version Ross J. Reedstrom
- Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version Don Baccus
- Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version Tom Samplonius
- Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version Don Baccus
- Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version Thomas Lockhart
- Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version Don Baccus
- Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version Adam Haberlach
- Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version Don Baccus
- Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version Vadim Mikheev
- Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version Don Baccus
- Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version Vadim Mikheev
- Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version The Hermit Hacker
- Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version Martin A. Marques
- Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version Martin A. Marques
- Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version The Hermit Hacker
- Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version Lamar Owen
- Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version Mitch Vincent
- Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version Lamar Owen
- Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version Trond Eivind GlomsrØd