In article <871tljepea....@jester.gateway.pace.com>, Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> Ned Deily <n...@acm.org> writes: > > (though I don't know why anyone would want to fork it). > > Same reason lots of people have forked Postgres. Or you might just want > to customize it. Well, for whatever reason one might have, one can: it's public domain software. > > I imagine that is done as an incentive to help > > finance the on-going development and maintenance of SQLite. > It's a pretty unusual and annoying trick that other projects have not > felt they had to resort to. > > > https://www.sqlite.org/testing.html > > Thanks, that's the page I remember. The TH3 test suite is the > interesting one and you can't get it without paying a lot of $$$$$. I > guess there is some semantic quibble possible about whether you pay for > the test suite, or (as they put it) pay for Consortium membership and > then (as a member) get the test suite for free. I don't have any special knowledge of the history or current status of the Consortium but it's not difficult to find information and blog posts about it. It seems like this was an approach Richard Hipp and major users of SQLite took to ensure a sustaining funding model for the project while ensuring its independence. It strikes me as a very reasonable and modest constraint given the immense good that the SQLite project has done for so many other projects over the years. Many other less important projects have foundered for lack of sustained funding. https://www.sqlite.org/consortium.html https://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2008/02/27/the-sqlite-consortium/ > Do you know the situation with the SQL Logic Test (SLT) also mentioned > on that page? No -- Ned Deily, n...@acm.org -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
