On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 02:08:02PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Amonson, Paul D" <paul.d.amonson@intel.com> writes:
> > I had our OSS internal team, who are experts in OSS licensing, review possible conflicts between the PostgreSQL
licenseand the BSD-Clause 3-like license for the CRC32C AVX-512 code, and they found no issues. Therefore, including
thenew license into the PostgreSQL codebase should be acceptable.
>
> Maybe you should get some actual lawyers to answer this type of
> question. The Chromium license this code cites is 3-clause-BSD
> style, which is NOT compatible: the "advertising" clause is
> significant.
>
> In any case, writing copyright notices that are pointers to
> external web pages is not how it's done around here. We generally
> operate on the assumption that the Postgres source code will
> outlive any specific web site. Dead links to incidental material
> might be okay, but legally relevant stuff not so much.
Agreed. The licenses are compatible in the sense that they can be
combined to create a unified work, but they cannot be combined without
modifying the license of the combined work. You would need to combine
the Postgres and Chrome license for this, and I highly doubt we are
going to be modifying the Postgres for this.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Only you can decide what is important to you.