> > > I totaly missed your point here. How closing source of
> > > ERserver is related to closing code of PostgreSQL DB server?
> > > Let me clear things:
> > >
> > > 1. ERserver isn't based on WAL. It will work with any version >= 6.5
> > >
> > > 2. WAL was partially sponsored by my employer, Sectorbase.com,
> > > not by PG, Inc.
> >
> > Has somebody thought about putting PG in the GPL licence
> > instead of the BSD?
> > PG inc would still be able to do there money giving support
> > (just like IBM, HP and Compaq are doing there share with Linux),
> > without been able to close the code.
This gets brought up every couple of months, I don't see the point
in denying any of the current Postgresql developers the chance
to make some money selling a non-freeware version of Postgresql.
We can also look at it another way, let's say ER server was meant
to be closed source, if the code it was derived from was GPL'd
then that chance was gone before it even happened. Hence no
reason to develop it.
*poof* no ER server.
--
-Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org]
"I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk."