> > Note that while Spread is open source in the sense that "the source is
> > available", it's license is significantly more restrictive than
> > PostgreSQL's:
> >
> > http://www.spread.org/license/
> >
>
> Interesting. It looks like a modified version of the old BSD license
> where you are required to mention you are using Spread. I believe we
> can get that reduced. (I think Darren already addressed this with
> them.) We certainly are not going to accept software that requires all
> PostgreSQL user sites to mention Spread.
>
I dont think this is the case. We don't redistribute spread
from the pg-replication site. There are links to the down
load area. I don't think this should be any different if
postgres-r is merged with the main postgresql tree. If
Spread is the group communication we choose to use for
postgresql replication, then I would think some Spread
information would be in order on the advocacy site, and
in any set up documentation for replication.
I have spoken to Yair Amir from the Spread camp on
several occasions, and they are very excited about the
replication project. I sure it won't be an issue, but
I will forward this message to him.
Darren