Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-26 Thread Bruce Momjian

I did some research on this item.  I downloaded the source code to WN from:

http://hopf.math.northwestern.edu/index.html

I could only find the most recent version. wn-2.4.7.  I then looked at
its image.c file:

http://momjian.us/expire/image.c

I looked at the last two functions in the file and compared it to what
we have in CVS, particularly the version of the code when it was first
added to CVS:


http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/utils/adt/geo_ops.c?rev=1.13;content-type=text%2Fplain

Again, look at the last two functions in the file.

You will see similarities and differences.  Many of the variable names
are the same, and there is an identical comment block.  The algorithm
used is very similar as well, but the style and formatting is different.

I have updated the code comment in CVS to mention the web site, GPL
license, and article describing the algorithm.

Not sure where to go from here.

---

bruce wrote:
 Tom Lane wrote:
  [ redirecting to -hackers, as I see no need for this to be a core issue ]
  
  Charles Comiskey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
   Hello,
   I've recently looked through the PostgreSQL code and a couple of 
   questions 
   surfaced.  I was hoping someone here may be able to answer them.  Two 
   have 
   links to possible GPL sources and the third is just a contribution 
   question. 
  
   item #1: Does the geo_ops.c file contain GPL code?
   Embedded within the geo_ops.c file is a John Franks copyright statement 
   referring to wn/image.c file from WN Server 1.15.1.  WN Server appears to 
   have been under the GPL license since 0.94 and continues to be offered 
   under the GPL license today.  John's letter to Linux Journal seems to 
   only 
   point the user to his WN Server distribution vs granting any specific 
   license.
 
 The comment is:
 
   /* poly_contain_pt()
* Test to see if the point is inside the polygon.
* Code adapted from integer-based routines in
*  Wn: A Server for the HTTP
*  File: wn/image.c
*  Version 1.15.1
*  Copyright (C) 1995  by John Franks
* (code offered for use by J. Franks in Linux Journal letter.)
*/
 
 That term adapted from isn't something Thomas would idly type, I
 think.  I bet it means he looked at John Franks' code and used it as a
 base for our code.  I am not concerned.
 
   Questions:
   1) Is any John Franks code really in this file?
   2) Did John provide a separate license for PostgreSQL to license it under 
   the BSD license?
  
  This code seems to have been inserted by Tom Lockhart on 1997-07-29
  (geo_ops.c rev 1.13).  Tom, any info on the copyright status?
  
   References:
   - 1994 e-mail with GPL reference to WN Server v0.94: 
   http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www-talk.1994q4/1080.html
   - 1995 e-mail from John with GPL license text reference: 
   http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www-talk.1995q1/0482.html
   - WN Server url today: http://hopf.math.northwestern.edu/
   - Link to Linux Journal article: http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/2197
  
  

-- 
  Bruce Momjian   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  EnterpriseDBhttp://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-25 Thread Michael Meskes
On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 09:45:45PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
 Michael, I saw your patch stating that the copyright was assigned to
 PGDG.  However, once that happens, we are of the policy to remove
 copyrights to individual users because it confuses things.
 
 Therefore, I have updated your applied patch to just mention the
 author's name, email address, and date.

If that suffices, fine with me. 

Michael
-- 
Michael Meskes
Email: Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo: michaelmeskes, Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

   http://archives.postgresql.org


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-24 Thread Bruce Momjian
Michael Meskes wrote:
 On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 11:37:08AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
   item #3: Carsten Wolff copyright in informix.c file
   The file informix.c contains a copyright from Carsten Wolff.  Did Carsten 
   directly contribute this file to the PostgreSQL project?
  
  This code was added by Michael Meskes in informix.c rev 1.6
  (2003-05-06).  Michael, any info on the exact copyright status?
 
 Yes. In fact the copyright belongs to credativ GmbH the company that
 paid Carsten for his work. As you may or may not know I'm the CEO of
 that company and can assure you that his work was contributed to the
 PostgreSQL project.

Michael, I saw your patch stating that the copyright was assigned to
PGDG.  However, once that happens, we are of the policy to remove
copyrights to individual users because it confuses things.

Therefore, I have updated your applied patch to just mention the
author's name, email address, and date.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  EnterpriseDBhttp://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
Index: src/interfaces/ecpg/compatlib/informix.c
===
RCS file: /cvsroot/pgsql/src/interfaces/ecpg/compatlib/informix.c,v
retrieving revision 1.44
diff -c -c -r1.44 informix.c
*** src/interfaces/ecpg/compatlib/informix.c	23 Jun 2006 14:50:01 -	1.44
--- src/interfaces/ecpg/compatlib/informix.c	25 Jun 2006 01:41:06 -
***
*** 666,679 
  	return 0;
  }
  
! /***
! 		  rfmt.c  -  description
! 			 ---
! 	begin : Wed Apr 2 2003
! 	copyright			 : (C) 2003 by Carsten Wolff
! 	email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
! 	Contributed under the PostgreSQL License by credativ GmbH
!  ***/
  
  static struct
  {
--- 666,675 
  	return 0;
  }
  
! /*
!  *	rfmt.c  -  description
!  *	by Carsten Wolff [EMAIL PROTECTED], Wed Apr 2 2003
!  */
  
  static struct
  {

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
   choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
   match


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-24 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote:
 [ redirecting to -hackers, as I see no need for this to be a core issue ]
 
 Charles Comiskey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  Hello,
  I've recently looked through the PostgreSQL code and a couple of questions 
  surfaced.  I was hoping someone here may be able to answer them.  Two have 
  links to possible GPL sources and the third is just a contribution 
  question. 
 
  item #1: Does the geo_ops.c file contain GPL code?
  Embedded within the geo_ops.c file is a John Franks copyright statement 
  referring to wn/image.c file from WN Server 1.15.1.  WN Server appears to 
  have been under the GPL license since 0.94 and continues to be offered 
  under the GPL license today.  John's letter to Linux Journal seems to only 
  point the user to his WN Server distribution vs granting any specific 
  license.

The comment is:

/* poly_contain_pt()
 * Test to see if the point is inside the polygon.
 * Code adapted from integer-based routines in
 *  Wn: A Server for the HTTP
 *  File: wn/image.c
 *  Version 1.15.1
 *  Copyright (C) 1995  by John Franks
 * (code offered for use by J. Franks in Linux Journal letter.)
 */

That term adapted from isn't something Thomas would idly type, I
think.  I bet it means he looked at John Franks' code and used it as a
base for our code.  I am not concerned.

  Questions:
  1) Is any John Franks code really in this file?
  2) Did John provide a separate license for PostgreSQL to license it under 
  the BSD license?
 
 This code seems to have been inserted by Tom Lockhart on 1997-07-29
 (geo_ops.c rev 1.13).  Tom, any info on the copyright status?
 
  References:
  - 1994 e-mail with GPL reference to WN Server v0.94: 
  http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www-talk.1994q4/1080.html
  - 1995 e-mail from John with GPL license text reference: 
  http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www-talk.1995q1/0482.html
  - WN Server url today: http://hopf.math.northwestern.edu/
  - Link to Linux Journal article: http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/2197
 
 
  item #2: Is dllinit.c GPL code?
  The file dllinit.c, located in the src/utils directory documents the 
  author as Mumit Khan.  Did Mumit Khan contribute this code and did he 
  contribute it for distribution under the PostgreSQL license?  If I read 
  correctly, the name stamp in CVS does not indicate that Mumit Khan 
  directly contributed this file.  I ask because this question has surfaced 
  as a forum item for a different project and Mumit Khan directly answered 
  their forum posting (http://curl.haxx.se/mail/lib-2002-11/0061.html).
 
 Per the comments in that thread, it would be pretty trivial to either
 rewrite or remove this file.  I don't think there is anything there that
 amounts to protectable content (and Mumit evidently agrees, see link)
 but let's do something about it anyway.  Can some of the Windows folk
 check whether we can just remove it?

File removed.

  item #3: Carsten Wolff copyright in informix.c file
  The file informix.c contains a copyright from Carsten Wolff.  Did Carsten 
  directly contribute this file to the PostgreSQL project?
 
 This code was added by Michael Meskes in informix.c rev 1.6
 (2003-05-06).  Michael, any info on the exact copyright status?

Fixed to remove copyright.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  EnterpriseDBhttp://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

   http://archives.postgresql.org


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-23 Thread Dave Page
 

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
 Andrew Dunstan
 Sent: 22 June 2006 23:09
 To: Tom Lane
 Cc: Bort, Paul; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
 Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions
 
 
 
 Something has broken Cygwin in the last 18 days ;-(

Is there any real reason to continue to support Cygwin? We've always
said it's not a first class port, and now we have the native port which
is it seems somewhat pointless expending further effort on it.

Regards, Dave.

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
   subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
   message can get through to the mailing list cleanly


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-23 Thread Magnus Hagander
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 Frankly this patch has significant infelicities. For example, 
 what is the reason for removing the standard protection 
 against double inclusion that header files should usually 
 have from pg_config.h.win32?

I've got to admit, I don't recall that. It may be an oversight - I keep
mixing up pg_config.h.win32 and port.h and port/win32.h in my head ;-) 

You will notice that the other two of those don't have it.

But it shouldn't be a problem - AFAIK it's only loaded from c.h, and
that one has protection.


 I assume that no test was done to see if this broke Cygwin, 
 despite the fact that if you have a Windows box to test on, 
 checking that you haven't broken Cygwin should not be too 
 difficult..

Given the amount of damage I've seen it do, Cygwin is definitly *not*
making it onto my development machines. So no, I didn't build it on
cygwin. However, I didn't intend for it to break of course - I tried
manual checking. Which I obviously didn't do good enough.

I'll try to set it up in a VM for testing.

 And why do win32 and cygwin now not include at all pg_config_os.h?

It's a way to avoid the step to copy win32\port.h in msvc. configure
copies it to pg_config_os.h. Since for win32 platforms (unfortunatly, at
this point it considers cygwin win32..)that will always be port/win32.h,
it explicitly includes that one instead.


Tom writes:

 Magnus, this was your patch, can you see about fixing the 
 collateral damage to the Cygwin build?

Will do. May be a ocuple of days before I can set up a VM with cygwin,
but I'll try to get it done as soon as I can.

//Magnus

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

   http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-23 Thread Michael Meskes
On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 11:37:08AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
  item #3: Carsten Wolff copyright in informix.c file
  The file informix.c contains a copyright from Carsten Wolff.  Did Carsten 
  directly contribute this file to the PostgreSQL project?
 
 This code was added by Michael Meskes in informix.c rev 1.6
 (2003-05-06).  Michael, any info on the exact copyright status?

Yes. In fact the copyright belongs to credativ GmbH the company that
paid Carsten for his work. As you may or may not know I'm the CEO of
that company and can assure you that his work was contributed to the
PostgreSQL project.

Michael
-- 
Michael Meskes
Email: Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo: michaelmeskes, Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
   subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
   message can get through to the mailing list cleanly


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-23 Thread Andrew Dunstan



Dave Page wrote:



Is there any real reason to continue to support Cygwin? We've always
said it's not a first class port, and now we have the native port which
is it seems somewhat pointless expending further effort on it.


 



Some people still use it for development, I believe. Similar arguments 
were used against our having the Win32 port in the first place. 
Personally I am inclined to support whatever platforms we reasonably 
can, and leave the choice to users rather than make it for them.


cheers

andrew

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-23 Thread John DeSoi


On Jun 23, 2006, at 3:10 AM, Dave Page wrote:


Is there any real reason to continue to support Cygwin? We've always
said it's not a first class port, and now we have the native port  
which

is it seems somewhat pointless expending further effort on it.



Are all the tools needed to compile from source on Win32 freely  
available?



John DeSoi, Ph.D.
http://pgedit.com/
Power Tools for PostgreSQL


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-23 Thread Tom Lane
Michael Meskes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 11:37:08AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
 item #3: Carsten Wolff copyright in informix.c file
 The file informix.c contains a copyright from Carsten Wolff.  Did Carsten 
 directly contribute this file to the PostgreSQL project?
 
 This code was added by Michael Meskes in informix.c rev 1.6
 (2003-05-06).  Michael, any info on the exact copyright status?

 Yes. In fact the copyright belongs to credativ GmbH the company that
 paid Carsten for his work. As you may or may not know I'm the CEO of
 that company and can assure you that his work was contributed to the
 PostgreSQL project.

That sounds fine --- could you add a note in the source code to this
effect?  Contributed under the PostgreSQL License or something like
that after the copyright notice would be sufficient.

regards, tom lane

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-23 Thread Dave Page
 

 -Original Message-
 From: John DeSoi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 Sent: 23 June 2006 14:56
 To: Dave Page
 Cc: Andrew Dunstan; Tom Lane; Bort, Paul; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
 Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions
 
 
 On Jun 23, 2006, at 3:10 AM, Dave Page wrote:
 
  Is there any real reason to continue to support Cygwin? We've always
  said it's not a first class port, and now we have the native port  
  which
  is it seems somewhat pointless expending further effort on it.
 
 
 Are all the tools needed to compile from source on Win32 freely  
 available?

Yes. Even when/if we add a VC++ build they will be.

Regards, Dave.

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
   choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
   match


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-23 Thread Tom Lane
Dave Page dpage@vale-housing.co.uk writes:
 Is there any real reason to continue to support Cygwin? We've always
 said it's not a first class port, and now we have the native port which
 is it seems somewhat pointless expending further effort on it.

I think the day will come when there's a good reason to decommission the
Cygwin port (ie, some problem that seems unreasonably hard to solve),
and then I'll be the first in line voting to do so.  But accidental
breakage due to someone being sloppy with #ifdefs for a different port
isn't a good reason.

Actually, my gripe about this one is that it wasn't detected promptly.
That patch went in two weeks ago; we should have known about the problem
within a couple days at most.  Seems like the Windows members of the
buildfarm don't run often enough.  The whole point of the buildfarm is
to spot problems while the code is still fresh in mind, no?

regards, tom lane

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


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-23 Thread Dave Page
 

 -Original Message-
 From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 Sent: 23 June 2006 15:15
 To: Dave Page
 Cc: Andrew Dunstan; Bort, Paul; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
 Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions 
 
 Actually, my gripe about this one is that it wasn't detected promptly.
 That patch went in two weeks ago; we should have known about 
 the problem
 within a couple days at most.  Seems like the Windows members of the
 buildfarm don't run often enough.  The whole point of the buildfarm is
 to spot problems while the code is still fresh in mind, no?

I think that speaks for the current usage of the cygwin port. Snake runs
native builds daily, but like Magnus and his dev box there's no way I'm
letting Cygwin anywhere near it. Istr that the only vaguely active
Cygwin member is Andrew's laptop.

Regards, Dave.

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

   http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq


Anyone still care about Cygwin? (was Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions)

2006-06-23 Thread Tom Lane
Dave Page dpage@vale-housing.co.uk writes:
 Actually, my gripe about this one is that it wasn't detected promptly.
 That patch went in two weeks ago; we should have known about 
 the problem
 within a couple days at most.  Seems like the Windows members of the
 buildfarm don't run often enough.  The whole point of the buildfarm is
 to spot problems while the code is still fresh in mind, no?

 I think that speaks for the current usage of the cygwin port. Snake runs
 native builds daily, but like Magnus and his dev box there's no way I'm
 letting Cygwin anywhere near it. Istr that the only vaguely active
 Cygwin member is Andrew's laptop.

Well, lack of interest is certainly adequate reason to decommission a
port.  If we can't find anyone who cares enough about Cygwin to host a
regularly-scheduled buildfarm member, I'm for blowing it off.

regards, tom lane

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


Re: Anyone still care about Cygwin? (was Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions)

2006-06-23 Thread Larry Rosenman
Tom Lane wrote:
 Dave Page dpage@vale-housing.co.uk writes:
 Actually, my gripe about this one is that it wasn't detected
 promptly. That patch went in two weeks ago; we should have known
 about 
 the problem
 within a couple days at most.  Seems like the Windows members of the
 buildfarm don't run often enough.  The whole point of the buildfarm
 is to spot problems while the code is still fresh in mind, no?
 
 I think that speaks for the current usage of the cygwin port. Snake
 runs native builds daily, but like Magnus and his dev box there's no
 way I'm letting Cygwin anywhere near it. Istr that the only vaguely
 active Cygwin member is Andrew's laptop.
 
 Well, lack of interest is certainly adequate reason to decommission
 a port.  If we can't find anyone who cares enough about Cygwin to
 host a regularly-scheduled buildfarm member, I'm for blowing it off.
 
What all's needed on the host for this?

I might be able to use either my house machine or my work desktop 
here @pervasive, or one of my test boxes here @pervasive.



-- 
Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 512-248-2683 E-Mail: ler@lerctr.org
US Mail: 430 Valona Loop, Round Rock, TX 78681-3893


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-23 Thread Michael Meskes
On Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 09:58:42AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
 That sounds fine --- could you add a note in the source code to this
 effect?  Contributed under the PostgreSQL License or something like
 that after the copyright notice would be sufficient.

No problem. Just committed it.

Michael
-- 
Michael Meskes
Email: Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo: michaelmeskes, Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
   choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
   match


Re: Anyone still care about Cygwin? (was Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions)

2006-06-23 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 Anyway, the lack of daily Cygwin builds is not permanent.

 There are several supported platforms not represented on the buildfarm - 
 e.g. the one HPUX member has never actually reported any results.

Yeah, and this is not a good thing.  Eventually I'd like to get to a
point where every platform we consider supported has regular buildfarm
reports.  No more calls for port reports during beta periods --- beta
work should focus on functionality testing, not getting it to build.

regards, tom lane

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

   http://archives.postgresql.org


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Tom Lane
[ redirecting to -hackers, as I see no need for this to be a core issue ]

Charles Comiskey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 Hello,
 I've recently looked through the PostgreSQL code and a couple of questions 
 surfaced.  I was hoping someone here may be able to answer them.  Two have 
 links to possible GPL sources and the third is just a contribution 
 question. 

 item #1: Does the geo_ops.c file contain GPL code?
 Embedded within the geo_ops.c file is a John Franks copyright statement 
 referring to wn/image.c file from WN Server 1.15.1.  WN Server appears to 
 have been under the GPL license since 0.94 and continues to be offered 
 under the GPL license today.  John's letter to Linux Journal seems to only 
 point the user to his WN Server distribution vs granting any specific 
 license.

 Questions:
 1) Is any John Franks code really in this file?
 2) Did John provide a separate license for PostgreSQL to license it under 
 the BSD license?

This code seems to have been inserted by Tom Lockhart on 1997-07-29
(geo_ops.c rev 1.13).  Tom, any info on the copyright status?

 References:
 - 1994 e-mail with GPL reference to WN Server v0.94: 
 http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www-talk.1994q4/1080.html
 - 1995 e-mail from John with GPL license text reference: 
 http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www-talk.1995q1/0482.html
 - WN Server url today: http://hopf.math.northwestern.edu/
 - Link to Linux Journal article: http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/2197


 item #2: Is dllinit.c GPL code?
 The file dllinit.c, located in the src/utils directory documents the 
 author as Mumit Khan.  Did Mumit Khan contribute this code and did he 
 contribute it for distribution under the PostgreSQL license?  If I read 
 correctly, the name stamp in CVS does not indicate that Mumit Khan 
 directly contributed this file.  I ask because this question has surfaced 
 as a forum item for a different project and Mumit Khan directly answered 
 their forum posting (http://curl.haxx.se/mail/lib-2002-11/0061.html).

Per the comments in that thread, it would be pretty trivial to either
rewrite or remove this file.  I don't think there is anything there that
amounts to protectable content (and Mumit evidently agrees, see link)
but let's do something about it anyway.  Can some of the Windows folk
check whether we can just remove it?


 item #3: Carsten Wolff copyright in informix.c file
 The file informix.c contains a copyright from Carsten Wolff.  Did Carsten 
 directly contribute this file to the PostgreSQL project?

This code was added by Michael Meskes in informix.c rev 1.6
(2003-05-06).  Michael, any info on the exact copyright status?

 Thank you,
 Charles Comiskey
 Tivoli Software
 IBM Software Group
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 919.224.1223 or TL 687-1223

regards, tom lane

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
   subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
   message can get through to the mailing list cleanly


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Magnus Hagander
  item #2: Is dllinit.c GPL code?
  The file dllinit.c, located in the src/utils directory 
 documents the 
  author as Mumit Khan.  Did Mumit Khan contribute this code 
 and did he 
  contribute it for distribution under the PostgreSQL license?  If I 
  read correctly, the name stamp in CVS does not indicate that Mumit 
  Khan directly contributed this file.  I ask because this 
 question has 
  surfaced as a forum item for a different project and Mumit Khan 
  directly answered their forum posting 
 (http://curl.haxx.se/mail/lib-2002-11/0061.html).
 
 Per the comments in that thread, it would be pretty trivial 
 to either rewrite or remove this file.  I don't think there 
 is anything there that amounts to protectable content (and 
 Mumit evidently agrees, see link) but let's do something 
 about it anyway.  Can some of the Windows folk check whether 
 we can just remove it?

I don't think it's needed on Win32. It's not included in my VC++ build,
because I forgot it :-), and it works just fine.

The point is that as long as we don't do anything in it (which we
don't), the runtime supplied default should be just fine.

I can't speak for cygwin, just standard win32.

//Magnus

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

   http://archives.postgresql.org


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Josh Berkus
Tom,

Augh. Does this mean that we need to backpatch earlier versions to remove 
the possible GPL links?

-- 
--Josh

Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

   http://archives.postgresql.org


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Tom Lane
Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 item #2: Is dllinit.c GPL code?

 I don't think it's needed on Win32. It's not included in my VC++ build,
 because I forgot it :-), and it works just fine.
 The point is that as long as we don't do anything in it (which we
 don't), the runtime supplied default should be just fine.
 I can't speak for cygwin, just standard win32.

The part of it that seems not to be a no-op is

#ifdef __CYGWIN__
__hDllInstance_base = hInst;
#endif   /* __CYGWIN__ */

#ifdef __CYGWIN__
_impure_ptr = __imp_reent_data;
#endif

and the whole thing is wrapped in

#if CYGWIN_VERSION_DLL_MAJOR  1001

so presumably this is only needed for old Cygwin versions.  Can anyone
say how old 1001 is and whether we still ought to care about it?

regards, tom lane

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

   http://archives.postgresql.org


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Tom Lane
Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com writes:
 Augh. Does this mean that we need to backpatch earlier versions to remove 
 the possible GPL links?

[ shrug... ]  I'm not planning to panic; we've still got explicit GPL
code that's not been cleaned out of contrib/ yet.  (Um, weren't you on
the hook to move those modules to pgfoundry projects?)

I think we should endeavor to clean up any license questions going
forward, but it's useless to worry about the back branches; they are
what they are, and anyone who actually wants to sue us could do so
anyway on the strength of releases already out there.

regards, tom lane

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

   http://archives.postgresql.org


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Josh Berkus
Tom,

 [ shrug... ]  I'm not planning to panic; we've still got explicit GPL
 code that's not been cleaned out of contrib/ yet.  (Um, weren't you on
 the hook to move those modules to pgfoundry projects?)

Yeah, thanks for reminding me.   Will do before feature freeze.  As soon as 
I can figure out how to generate a patch that removes directories.

 I think we should endeavor to clean up any license questions going
 forward, but it's useless to worry about the back branches; they are
 what they are, and anyone who actually wants to sue us could do so
 anyway on the strength of releases already out there.

Hmmm ... I don't know.  I'd be in favor of providing patches in case people 
care enough to fix the issue.  Maybe not until the next general patch 
release, but with that.

-- 
--Josh

Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
   choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
   match


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Bort, Paul
 
 so presumably this is only needed for old Cygwin versions.  Can anyone
 say how old 1001 is and whether we still ought to care about it?
 

IIRC, I've been on 1.5.x for at least three years. 1.0/1.1 seems to be
around 2000/2001, based on a quick Google. So it's definitely older than
PG 7.3.

Regards, 
Paul Bort 

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

   http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Tom Lane
Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com writes:
 Yeah, thanks for reminding me.   Will do before feature freeze.  As soon as 
 I can figure out how to generate a patch that removes directories.

Don't worry about that; CVS never deletes directories.  But anyway,
I can easily handle removing the code.  I just want someone else to
stuff it into pgfoundry, because I'm not up to speed on pgfoundry.

I believe the current hit-list for modules to move to pgfoundry is

adddepend
dbase
dbmirror
fulltextindex
mSQL-interface
mac
oracle
tips
userlock

regards, tom lane

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

   http://archives.postgresql.org


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Josh Berkus
Tom,

 adddepend
 dbase
 dbmirror
 fulltextindex
 mSQL-interface
 mac
 oracle
 tips
 userlock

I think you're right.  I will do this before I leave town on the 30th.

-- 
--Josh

Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
   subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
   message can get through to the mailing list cleanly


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Stefan Kaltenbrunner
Tom Lane wrote:
 Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com writes:
 Yeah, thanks for reminding me.   Will do before feature freeze.  As soon as 
 I can figure out how to generate a patch that removes directories.
 
 Don't worry about that; CVS never deletes directories.  But anyway,
 I can easily handle removing the code.  I just want someone else to
 stuff it into pgfoundry, because I'm not up to speed on pgfoundry.
 
 I believe the current hit-list for modules to move to pgfoundry is
 
 adddepend
 dbase
 dbmirror
 fulltextindex
 mSQL-interface
 mac
 oracle
 tips
 userlock

one thing to note is that at least on IRC we are still getting a notable
number of questions about fixing up constraint triggers left over from
importing dumps of old pg versions.
The usual answer to that is try contrib/adddepend - but i guess
redirecting them to pgfoundry will work too.


Stefan

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Andrew Dunstan



Bort, Paul wrote:


so presumably this is only needed for old Cygwin versions.  Can anyone
say how old 1001 is and whether we still ought to care about it?

   



IIRC, I've been on 1.5.x for at least three years. 1.0/1.1 seems to be
around 2000/2001, based on a quick Google. So it's definitely older than
PG 7.3.
 



1.3 was announced in May 2001 according to the cygwin announce mailing 
list archives, so I think we can safely ignore the section in question. 
If anyone hasn't upgraded their cygwin since then they probably have 
more problems than this would give them.


cheers

andrew


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 Bort, Paul wrote:
 so presumably this is only needed for old Cygwin versions.  Can anyone
 say how old 1001 is and whether we still ought to care about it?
 
 IIRC, I've been on 1.5.x for at least three years. 1.0/1.1 seems to be
 around 2000/2001, based on a quick Google. So it's definitely older than
 PG 7.3.

 1.3 was announced in May 2001 according to the cygwin announce mailing 
 list archives, so I think we can safely ignore the section in question. 

OK, so let's yank the file altogether and see what happens.

I can make a cut at fixing the makefiles based on removing references to
DLLINIT, but it might be better if someone who's in a position to test
the results on Windows did the patch ...

regards, tom lane

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


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Tom Lane wrote:

 Charles Comiskey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  item #3: Carsten Wolff copyright in informix.c file
  The file informix.c contains a copyright from Carsten Wolff.  Did Carsten 
  directly contribute this file to the PostgreSQL project?

Wow, I see what mess we would be into if we had retained the per-person
copyright message on each file.

-- 
Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Larry Rosenman
Josh Berkus wrote:
 Tom,
 
 adddepend
 dbase
 dbmirror
 fulltextindex
 mSQL-interface
 mac
 oracle
 tips
 userlock
 
 I think you're right.  I will do this before I leave town on the 30th.

before anyone asks, the files I wrote in contrib/mac are free to be licensed
any way the 
project sees fit.

LER


-- 
Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 512-248-2683 E-Mail: ler@lerctr.org
US Mail: 430 Valona Loop, Round Rock, TX 78681-3893


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Andrew Dunstan



Tom Lane wrote:



OK, so let's yank the file altogether and see what happens.

I can make a cut at fixing the makefiles based on removing references to
DLLINIT, but it might be better if someone who's in a position to test
the results on Windows did the patch ...


 



Something has broken Cygwin in the last 18 days ;-(

See 
http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=gibbondt=2006-06-22%2021:59:16


I will have a look to see if 8.1 works with ripping this out.

cheers

andrew

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

  http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Andrew Dunstan



Andrew Dunstan wrote:




Tom Lane wrote:



OK, so let's yank the file altogether and see what happens.

I can make a cut at fixing the makefiles based on removing references to
DLLINIT, but it might be better if someone who's in a position to test
the results on Windows did the patch ...


 



Something has broken Cygwin in the last 18 days ;-(

See 
http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=gibbondt=2006-06-22%2021:59:16 



I will have a look to see if 8.1 works with ripping this out.




On REL8_1_STABLE sources commenting out the DLLINIT definition in 
Makefile.cygwin works just fine. Same goes for 
Win32/HEAD/Makefile.win32.  I just did  complete (unreported) buildfarm 
run with these changes made, so I think ripping that out should work.


Meanwhile, I'd like to know how to fix the Cygwin build on HEAD. I 
suspect it was the MSVC improvements that did it.


cheers

andrew





---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 On REL8_1_STABLE sources commenting out the DLLINIT definition in 
 Makefile.cygwin works just fine. Same goes for 
 Win32/HEAD/Makefile.win32.  I just did  complete (unreported) buildfarm 
 run with these changes made, so I think ripping that out should work.

OK, I'll do that.

 Meanwhile, I'd like to know how to fix the Cygwin build on HEAD. I 
 suspect it was the MSVC improvements that did it.

Probably.  This is the commit:

2006-06-07 18:24  momjian

* configure, configure.in, src/backend/libpq/ip.c,
src/backend/port/dynloader/win32.c,
src/backend/port/win32/Makefile,
src/backend/postmaster/postmaster.c,
src/backend/postmaster/syslogger.c, src/backend/utils/adt/float.c,
src/backend/utils/fmgr/dfmgr.c, src/backend/utils/mb/encnames.c,
src/bin/initdb/initdb.c, src/bin/pg_controldata/pg_controldata.c,
src/bin/pg_ctl/pg_ctl.c, src/bin/pg_dump/pg_backup_archiver.c,
src/bin/pg_dump/pg_backup_db.c, src/bin/pg_dump/pg_backup_null.c,
src/bin/pg_dump/pg_backup_tar.c, src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c,
src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dumpall.c, src/bin/pg_dump/pg_restore.c,
src/bin/pg_resetxlog/pg_resetxlog.c, src/bin/psql/command.c,
src/bin/psql/copy.c, src/bin/psql/print.c, src/bin/psql/win32.mak,
src/include/c.h, src/include/getaddrinfo.h,
src/include/pg_config.h.win32, src/include/port.h,
src/include/libpq/pqcomm.h, src/include/port/win32.h,
src/include/port/win32_msvc/dirent.h,
src/include/port/win32_msvc/unistd.h,
src/include/port/win32_msvc/utime.h,
src/include/port/win32_msvc/sys/file.h,
src/include/port/win32_msvc/sys/param.h,
src/include/port/win32_msvc/sys/time.h,
src/include/storage/s_lock.h, src/interfaces/libpq/fe-connect.c,
src/interfaces/libpq/fe-misc.c, src/interfaces/libpq/win32.c,
src/interfaces/libpq/win32.mak, src/port/dirent.c, src/port/exec.c,
src/port/getaddrinfo.c, src/port/inet_aton.c, src/port/thread.c,
src/port/win32error.c, src/timezone/localtime.c: Prepare code to be
built by MSVC:

o  remove many WIN32_CLIENT_ONLY defines
o  add WIN32_ONLY_COMPILER define
o  add 3rd argument to open() for portability
o  add include/port/win32_msvc directory for
   system includes

Magnus Hagander

regards, tom lane

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


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Andrew Dunstan



Tom Lane wrote:

Meanwhile, I'd like to know how to fix the Cygwin build on HEAD. I 
suspect it was the MSVC improvements that did it.
   



Probably.  This is the commit:

2006-06-07 18:24  momjian

 


[file list snipped]


Prepare code to be
built by MSVC:

o  remove many WIN32_CLIENT_ONLY defines
o  add WIN32_ONLY_COMPILER define
o  add 3rd argument to open() for portability
o  add include/port/win32_msvc directory for
   system includes

Magnus Hagander


 



Yes.

Frankly this patch has significant infelicities. For example, what is 
the reason for removing the standard protection against double inclusion 
that header files should usually have from pg_config.h.win32?


I assume that no test was done to see if this broke Cygwin, despite the 
fact that if you have a Windows box to test on, checking that you 
haven't broken Cygwin should not be too difficult.. And why do win32 and 
cygwin now not include at all pg_config_os.h?


I am not sure I know where to begin to look to find out how to fix 
things, and I don't have the time to do it either.


cheers

andrew



---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

  http://archives.postgresql.org


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 Meanwhile, I'd like to know how to fix the Cygwin build on HEAD. I 
 suspect it was the MSVC improvements that did it.

The patch to c.h certainly had no compunction about possibly changing
the behavior for Cygwin:

***
*** 82,94 
  #endif
  
  #if defined(WIN32) || defined(__CYGWIN__)
! #ifndef WIN32_CLIENT_ONLY
! /* We have to redefine some system functions after they are included above */
! #include pg_config_os.h
! #else
! #include port/win32.h   /* We didn't run configure, but 
this is our
!* port file */
! #endif
  #endif
  
  /* Must be before gettext() games below */
--- 80,90 
  #endif
  
  #if defined(WIN32) || defined(__CYGWIN__)
! /* We have to redefine some system functions after they are included above.
!  *
!  * use port/win32.h directly to work on both mingw and non-mingw.
!  */
! #include port/win32.h
  #endif
  
  /* Must be before gettext() games below */

I'm not too sure about the changes in getaddrinfo.c, either.

regards, tom lane

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Andrew Dunstan



Tom Lane wrote:


Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 

Meanwhile, I'd like to know how to fix the Cygwin build on HEAD. I 
suspect it was the MSVC improvements that did it.
   



The patch to c.h certainly had no compunction about possibly changing
the behavior for Cygwin:


 


[snip]


I'm not too sure about the changes in getaddrinfo.c, either.


 


Maybe we need to divorce Cygwin and Win32.

cheers

andrew

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 Tom Lane wrote:
 The patch to c.h certainly had no compunction about possibly changing
 the behavior for Cygwin:

 Maybe we need to divorce Cygwin and Win32.

That seems like probably an overreaction.  The impression I got was that
this patch had actually moved the MSVC port quite a long way towards
being like the Cygwin port.  It was just sloppy :-(.

Magnus, this was your patch, can you see about fixing the collateral
damage to the Cygwin build?

regards, tom lane

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


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Thomas Lockhart



1) Is any John Franks code really in this file?


Possibly, maybe probably. I don't remember the details (9 years is a 
long time!) but almost certainly any code or algorithms were 
specifically for the inside or outside routines.


2) Did John provide a separate license for PostgreSQL to license it under 
the BSD license?


Not explicitly that I can recall.


This code seems to have been inserted by Tom Lockhart on 1997-07-29
(geo_ops.c rev 1.13).  Tom, any info on the copyright status?


None, beyond the info you already resurrected. I vaguely recall that I 
did take the LJ letter as an invitation to reuse algorithms. I would 
guess that I had possible licensing conflicts in mind so would have 
tried to avoid them, but it would probably be best for someone to 
evaluate that from the current code bases. I may have preserved the 
Franks info for attribution of concepts to a specific person and version.


My (also vague) recollection is that the original Postgres algorithm was 
just broken. I would suggest looking at the code, contacting J. Franks 
if there are questions or a need for license clarification or 
authorization, and finding an alternative algorithm if necessary.


hth

- Tom

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings


Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

2006-06-22 Thread Tom Lane
Thomas Lockhart lockhart@fourpalms.org writes:
 This code seems to have been inserted by Tom Lockhart on 1997-07-29
 (geo_ops.c rev 1.13).  Tom, any info on the copyright status?

 None, beyond the info you already resurrected. I vaguely recall that I 
 did take the LJ letter as an invitation to reuse algorithms. I would 
 guess that I had possible licensing conflicts in mind so would have 
 tried to avoid them, but it would probably be best for someone to 
 evaluate that from the current code bases. I may have preserved the 
 Franks info for attribution of concepts to a specific person and version.

Thanks for answering, Tom.  Charles, since you were the one interested,
maybe you could compare the geo_ops.c code to the Franks code and see
if it looks like Tom borrowed code or just the algorithms?

 My (also vague) recollection is that the original Postgres algorithm was 
 just broken.

Yeah, I saw while tracing the CVS history that the code you replaced
defined overlaps as bounding boxes overlap, which is surely not good
enough for polygons ;-)

 I would suggest looking at the code, contacting J. Franks 
 if there are questions or a need for license clarification or 
 authorization, and finding an alternative algorithm if necessary.

The algorithms are probably public-domain, but we might need a
clean-room implementation :-(

regards, tom lane

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
   choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
   match