On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 8:09 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > On 2015-10-22 16:26:10 -0700, David Fetter wrote: >> To be affective negatively by libreadline's viral license, an entity >> would need to fork the psql client in proprietary ways that they did >> not wish not to make available to end users, at the same time linking >> in libreadline. > >> Maybe I'm missing something big, but I really don't see people out >> there shipping a libreadline-enabled psql client, details of whose >> source they'd want to keep a deep, dark secret. > > Isn't that just about every proprietary fork of postgres? Most have > added backend features and I guess many of those have in turn added > support to psql for those features. Sure it'd probably in reality be > relatively harmless for them to release these psql modifications, but I > rather doubt their management will generally see it that way.
Yeah, exactly. EnterpriseDB have to keep libedit working even if the PostgreSQL community dropped support, so I hope we don't decide to do that. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
