Re: [PATCHES] initdb copyright notice
On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 14:11, Andrew Dunstan wrote: Neil Conway asked me if we need a copyright notice to cover the code I borrowed from FreeBSD in initdb.c. I wasn't sure, but in case we do here is a patch to include it. Unless I'm mistaken, all of the FreeBSD code is under the 3 clause license. However, the easiest way to find out is to look at the header of the files that you borrowed code from. We don't want the 4 clause unless necessary. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [PATCHES] initdb copyright notice
Bruce Momjian wrote: I have grabbed code from NetBSD before, and I just mention that fact at the top of the file. There is no need to repeat their license as it is the same as our license. I just added the last line: * Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2003, PostgreSQL Global Development Group * Portions Copyright (c) 1994, Regents of the University of California * Portions taken from FreeBSD. OK, cool. andrew ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: 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: [PATCHES] initdb copyright notice
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have grabbed code from NetBSD before, and I just mention that fact at the top of the file. There is no need to repeat their license as it is the same as our license. src/port/qsort.c is wrong, then: (a) it includes the full NetBSD copyright/warranty statement (b) it claims to be covered by the 4 clause BSD license. A quick grep of the source tree indicates that the following files claim to be covered by the 4 clause BSD license: $ grep -rlI 'This product includes software developed' * contrib/mysql/my2pg.pl contrib/pgcrypto/README.pgcrypto contrib/pgcrypto/blf.c contrib/pgcrypto/blf.h src/backend/port/darwin/system.c src/backend/port/dynloader/freebsd.c src/backend/port/dynloader/netbsd.c src/backend/port/dynloader/openbsd.c src/backend/utils/mb/wstrcmp.c src/backend/utils/mb/wstrncmp.c src/port/crypt.c src/port/getopt.c src/port/getopt_long.c src/port/inet_aton.c src/port/qsort.c src/port/snprintf.c src/port/strtol.c src/port/strtoul.c -Neil ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [PATCHES] initdb copyright notice
Yes, in cases where I take the entire file unchanged, I don't change the copyright, but I think we can take the copyright of the project rather than those of the individual files. --- Neil Conway wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have grabbed code from NetBSD before, and I just mention that fact at the top of the file. There is no need to repeat their license as it is the same as our license. src/port/qsort.c is wrong, then: (a) it includes the full NetBSD copyright/warranty statement (b) it claims to be covered by the 4 clause BSD license. A quick grep of the source tree indicates that the following files claim to be covered by the 4 clause BSD license: $ grep -rlI 'This product includes software developed' * contrib/mysql/my2pg.pl contrib/pgcrypto/README.pgcrypto contrib/pgcrypto/blf.c contrib/pgcrypto/blf.h src/backend/port/darwin/system.c src/backend/port/dynloader/freebsd.c src/backend/port/dynloader/netbsd.c src/backend/port/dynloader/openbsd.c src/backend/utils/mb/wstrcmp.c src/backend/utils/mb/wstrncmp.c src/port/crypt.c src/port/getopt.c src/port/getopt_long.c src/port/inet_aton.c src/port/qsort.c src/port/snprintf.c src/port/strtol.c src/port/strtoul.c -Neil -- Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup.| Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: 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: [PATCHES] initdb copyright notice
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't change the copyright, but I think we can take the copyright of the project rather than those of the individual files. So can we remove the offending license clauses, then? Also, it's worth noting that the license in 'COPYRIGHT' is not exactly the same as the 3 clause BSD license the BSDs are licensed under, which is: --- Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. 3. Neither the name of the University nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission. --- (from http://www.netbsd.org/Goals/redistribution.html) For example, the 3rd clause is no where to be found in our license. Not being a lawyer, I'm not sure how significant this is. -Neil ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PATCHES] initdb copyright notice
I think there was an updated BSD license approved by Berkeley that we are using. If we took the file unchanged, I would not remove the copyright because it is the file _unchanged_, no? --- Neil Conway wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't change the copyright, but I think we can take the copyright of the project rather than those of the individual files. So can we remove the offending license clauses, then? Also, it's worth noting that the license in 'COPYRIGHT' is not exactly the same as the 3 clause BSD license the BSDs are licensed under, which is: --- Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. 3. Neither the name of the University nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission. --- (from http://www.netbsd.org/Goals/redistribution.html) For example, the 3rd clause is no where to be found in our license. Not being a lawyer, I'm not sure how significant this is. -Neil -- Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup.| Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send unregister YourEmailAddressHere to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [PATCHES] initdb copyright notice
Neil Conway wrote: A quick grep of the source tree indicates that the following files claim to be covered by the 4 clause BSD license: $ grep -rlI 'This product includes software developed' * contrib/mysql/my2pg.pl contrib/pgcrypto/README.pgcrypto contrib/pgcrypto/blf.c You must be careful with 3 clause vs. 4 clause BSD licenses: The advertising clause for UC Berkeley is now void, but all other advertising clauses are still in force. i.e. blf.c contains the line This product includes software developed by Niels Provos, and that must be obeyed. -- Manfred ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [PATCHES] initdb copyright notice
Neil Conway wrote: To summarize, my understanding is that there are two problems: (1) Some of the files in the main source tree are 4 clause BSD. Since PostgreSQL is derived from these files, we fall under its licensing restrictions, namely the advertising clause. I don't believe this is true, as UC have apparently given a blanket waiver of the advertising clause and authorized its removal. Of course an advertising clause that referred to a party other than the Regents of UC would still apply, cheers andrew ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: 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: [PATCHES] initdb copyright notice
Neil Conway wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think there was an updated BSD license approved by Berkeley that we are using. I think this is an area where we need a higher degree of certainty than that. I think our BSD license version came from FreeBSD. -- Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup.| Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
