On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 08:19:35AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > I'm fairly sure that I'm right. But my point isn't that we should "trust > Andres implicitly ™" (although that's obviously not a bad starting point > ;)). But rather, given that that is a reasonable assumption that such > agreements are legally possible, we can decide whether we want to take > advantage of such terms *assuming they are legally sound*. Then, if, and > only if, we decide that that's interesting from a policy POV, we can > verify those assumptions with lawyers.
> > Given we're far from the first project dealing with this, and that > companies that have shown themselves to be reasonably trustworthy around > open source, like Red Hat, assuming that such agreements are sound seems > quite reasonable. Sun Microsystems seemed reasonably trustworthy too. > I find it fairly hubristic to just assume bad faith, or lack of skill, > on part of the drafters of Apache2, GLPv3, RH patent promise, ... that > they either didn't think about bankruptcy or didn't care about > it. They're certainly better lawyers than any of us here. True. It would be nice if we could get an answer about bankruptcy from Red Hat. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +