On Sun, Jan 05, 2020 at 05:46:48PM -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Sun, Jan 5, 2020 at 5:39 PM Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Looking at the stats, it's clear that it took a lot of code from other >> files, so it seems disingenuous to claim that it doesn't have even a >> single line that isn't copyrighted by UCB regents. > > I took that claim at face value. Perhaps it was just an oversight. > But if it really wasn't, then it's not just "portions" of the > copyright that go to the PGDG. > >> I think the easiest is to state that all files, even new files are >> Portions (c) each of these entities, period. Trying to distinguish code >> that's not even a single line derived from UCB Regents seems really >> labor-intensive. > > That seems like a reasonable policy to me, outside of third-party code > that gets vendored into the tree. I am also in favor of being > conservative about this.
That's also a no-brainer. So +1 to that. If we were to make that more formal, could we add something in the docs in [1]? An idea could be a new section dedicated to it. [1]: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/12/source.html -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
