On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 15:17 +1100, FAST PostgreSQL wrote:

> We are happy to provide that. If and when it comes to the final patch being 
> accepted, we can send a copyright waiver mail which will put our source code 
> contribution under the BSD license.

This approach is not practically workable and is a terrible shame.

What would happen if everybody said, "Well, since Fujitsu want to act
like that, we won't grant a BSD licence on our material until they grant
a BSD licence on theirs." Deadlock.

How do we know that you'll ever give that waiver? What would stop you
from making contributions right up to the last minute, receiving lots of
useful feedback, then at the last minute pulling the patch, once you
think its got no problems in it? If you do this, how will any of us fend
off *our* corporate lawyers who would like to do the same (probably)? Or
did you think the various companies on this list don't have any?

I provided my detailed implementation thoughts on the initial proposal.
Should I ignore posts from Fujitsu in the future because of this issue? 

Open source requires trust, not legal brinkmanship. If you're even
thinking of submitting patches here, then it should already be clear
that the people on this list are better friends to you than people from
other companies who provide non-PostgreSQL-based services and products.
If you don't believe that, it seems better not to post at all.

I'll trust you, and hope that you'll grow to trust others back.

  Simon Riggs             
  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to