Dave Page wrote: > On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 11:49, Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> wrote: > >> Depends on your definition of "distribute" (and what part you are > >> specifically referring to). There's no tarball, but the installer > >> sources are on git.postgresql.org. > > > > Oh, my bad - they're back. I was referring to our discussion a couple > > of weeks back (I think), when you said that was too much work :-P > > For the record, it wasn't keeping the PG installer source code public > that was too much work, it was cleaning out some of the unrelated code > from other installers.
Well, we are going down a slippery slope if we think the click-through installers are OK to use readline and distribute because we supply the source for the installers --- that then requires anyone using the binaries (or libraries) in those installers to also supply the source code, e.g. GPL. :-( I am not saying they have to, but falling back to the "oh we give source code for the click-through installers" is not a position we can fall back on without affecting our users. Also, I think part of the problem for Debian is that they distribute readline and Postgres because they are the operating system vendor. I don't think the "use the OS library if already present" interpretation of the GPL really thought about that case. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
