> > Note that while Spread is open source in the sense that "the source is > > available", it's license is significantly more restrictive than > > PostgreSQL's: > > > > http://www.spread.org/license/ > > > > Interesting. It looks like a modified version of the old BSD license > where you are required to mention you are using Spread. I believe we > can get that reduced. (I think Darren already addressed this with > them.) We certainly are not going to accept software that requires all > PostgreSQL user sites to mention Spread. >
I dont think this is the case. We don't redistribute spread from the pg-replication site. There are links to the down load area. I don't think this should be any different if postgres-r is merged with the main postgresql tree. If Spread is the group communication we choose to use for postgresql replication, then I would think some Spread information would be in order on the advocacy site, and in any set up documentation for replication. I have spoken to Yair Amir from the Spread camp on several occasions, and they are very excited about the replication project. I sure it won't be an issue, but I will forward this message to him. Darren ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
