Re: [HACKERS] Re: Notation for nextval() (was Re: Several small patches)

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Thomas Lockhart
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Re: Notation for nextval() (was Re: Several small patches)
Дата
Msg-id 385A6F21.DE60F55B@alumni.caltech.edu
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Notation for nextval() (was Re: Several small patches)  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] Re: Notation for nextval() (was Re: Several small patches)  (wieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck))
Список pgsql-hackers
> > The difference in the copyright notice patch is just extending the 1994 -
> > 1999 to 2000 and aligning the quotes.
> I believe that at one point we came to a sort-of conclusion that this
> whole deal is (C) UCB until 1995(6?) and (C) PostgreSQL Global Development
> Group 1996-present. Don't give intellectual property to people that didn't
> do anything.

Yes, this is the way we should be annotating Postgres afaik. UCB would
be aghast to find that they need to defend themselves against all of
the changes in the last three years :)

Do we now have things in the code tree which do not carry two
copyrights, or just the Postgres Dev Group copyright plus a reference
to the full text in the docs?
                  - Thomas

-- 
Thomas Lockhart                lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu
South Pasadena, California


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: wieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck)
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] NOTICE: LockRelease: locktable lookup failed, no lock
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] psql vs. gcc