On 10/15/2010 02:36 AM, Greg Stark wrote:
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Tom Lane<t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Bruce Momjian<br...@momjian.us> writes:
Should we consider moving pg_filedump into our /contrib?
Can't: it's GPL.
I don't particularly see a problem with having GPL'd contrib modules.
It would mean any users hoping to redistribute the package couldn't
include those modules except under the GPL. But most repackagers don't
include the contrib modules anyways. Even ones that do and want to
include those modules would only have to include the source to that
module.
I can see not wanting to let that camel's nose in for fear of having
packagers always be uncertain about the status of each contrib module
though.
Didn't we go through the exercise of removing modules that were GPLed a
few years ago?
Having a plethora of different licenses covering code in our repository
seems like a recipe for major confusion, and I think is to be avoided.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
