On Mit, 2004-10-27 at 14:46 -0400, Scot L. Harris wrote:
> As such IMHO the better option is to switch databases. That is my
> choice. You can pay mysql if you like.
I do not need to as long as I either stay GPL or do not distribute
binaries. In both cases it is very likely that you someone is trying to
make money and it is only fair that MySQL gets their share.
> I am less sure about your second statement. If a company added their
> own patented extensions then it would in effect not be postgresql
> anymore, it would be based on postgresql. But if that did occur I
> believe you would find very few people would adopt such a package unless
> they released the patent back to postgresql. Market forces at work.
Do you really think that people would deny a more advanced product just
because of licensing issues? Have you heard of anyone not using Windows
because it's IP stack is from BSD? Give PostgreSQL a fancy management
and/or OLAP interface and it's ready for sale.
Tom
--
T h o m a s Z e h e t b a u e r ( TZ251 )
PGP encrypted mail preferred - KeyID 96FFCB89
finger thomasz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx for key
Hi, I'm a tagline virus. Please add me to your signature and help me spread :)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
