Обсуждение: Re: pgAdmin licence
> ------- Original Message ------- > From: Andreas Pflug <pgadmin@pse-consulting.de> > To: Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org> > Sent: 12/10/07, 22:11:36 > Subject: Re: pgAdmin licence > > Dave, > since pgImport was originally written to import from file to MSSQL, with > pgsql support added later (and pgConnection/pgSet never supported COPY), > you're trying to see stuff that's not there (nor is factory.cpp). > So when you said: > The base classes however are reused by several other projects, including pgImport. were you making it up? If you are not using pgAdmin code in your closed source projects, why was it such a problem when thepgAdmin project files were upgraded which, as you said, broke your other private code? Regards, Dave
Dave Page wrote: > >> ------- Original Message ------- >> From: Andreas Pflug <pgadmin@pse-consulting.de> >> To: Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org> >> Sent: 12/10/07, 22:11:36 >> Subject: Re: pgAdmin licence >> >> Dave, >> since pgImport was originally written to import from file to MSSQL, with >> pgsql support added later (and pgConnection/pgSet never supported COPY), >> you're trying to see stuff that's not there (nor is factory.cpp). >> >> > > So when you said: > > >> The base classes however are reused by several other projects, including pgImport. >> > > were you making it up? If you are not using pgAdmin code in your closed source projects, why was it such a problem whenthe pgAdmin project files were upgraded which, as you said, broke your other private code? > > Dave whatsup? Are you trying to take the words out of my mouth? pgImport is a few weeks old and just a tool for me (and whoever likes to use it), not customer software projects as the one that were broken back then. Regards, Andreas
Andreas Pflug wrote: > Dave whatsup? I'm trying to do three things (in no particular order): 1) Change the pgAdmin licence to Artistic 2.0 and above. You are the only developer who has refused permission to do that, however that is your right and we will respect it. 2) Protect the rights of those who have contributed to pgAdmin. You have stated that your private work for your customers was broken by changes to pgAdmin, and that you have used pgAdmin base classes in pgImport which is not distributed in any way that would satisfy the pgAdmin licence. You have since said that you're not using any pgAdmin code. 3) Understand why we've been having this pointless argument for 18 months now. Originally I thought it was because you disagreed with the decision that was made to use the wxGrid control in the Query Tool but earlier in this thread you said that was not the case. You then said it was because I changes the Windows build environment to VC8 without consulting you, however the archives show that we did discuss it and the only concern you raised turned out to be a non-issue. Point 1 is resolved. Point 2 is still an unknown. Are you using pgAdmin or pgAdmin-derived code in any projects without fulfilling the requirements of the licence? If you are, I would ask that you rectify that as soon as practical. Point 3 leaves me both saddened and confused. Given your recent comments, and the history in the list archives I cannot understand why this disagreement is happening or how it started. We've worked together on pgAdmin for years, and we've drunk beer together on the other side of the world. Can we not resolve this and move on? Regards, Dave.
Dave Page wrote: > Andreas Pflug wrote: > >> Dave whatsup? >> > > I'm trying to do three things (in no particular order): > > 1) Change the pgAdmin licence to Artistic 2.0 and above. > > You are the only developer who has refused permission to do that, > however that is your right and we will respect it. > > 2) Protect the rights of those who have contributed to pgAdmin. > > You have stated that your private work for your customers was broken by > changes to pgAdmin, and that you have used pgAdmin base classes in > pgImport which is not distributed in any way that would satisfy the > pgAdmin licence. > > You have since said that you're not using any pgAdmin code. > > 3) Understand why we've been having this pointless argument for 18 > months now. > > Originally I thought it was because you disagreed with the decision that > was made to use the wxGrid control in the Query Tool but earlier in this > thread you said that was not the case. > > You then said it was because I changes the Windows build environment to > VC8 without consulting you, however the archives show that we did > discuss it and the only concern you raised turned out to be a non-issue. > > Point 1 is resolved. > > Point 2 is still an unknown. Are you using pgAdmin or pgAdmin-derived > code in any projects without fulfilling the requirements of the licence? > If you are, I would ask that you rectify that as soon as practical. > OMG. Can you imagine I feel I can't use my own code as I wish? For peace sake, I added a reference to the version info. > Point 3 leaves me both saddened and confused. Given your recent > comments, and the history in the list archives I cannot understand why > this disagreement is happening or how it started. We've worked together > on pgAdmin for years, and we've drunk beer together on the other side of > the world. Can we not resolve this and move on? > Depends on what you call "resolve" and "move on". I'm not inclined to reread and quote the messages we exchanged back then (most of them in private IIRC), so in short from my memory: - you removed working code, replacing it with half-brewn wxGrid code that had some bad behaviour. I used the query tool heavily, and rely on it, and thus was annoyed seeing the main tool (at least temporarily) degraded. To repeat, I'm exceptionally sensitive about the query tool because it was the main reason to start work on pgAdmin. I know I made this point very clear. I recommitted the working stuff, leaving wxGrid code there for conditional compilation, you removed it completely again. Over the next weeks, I used my non-committed trunk (to stay working), and enhanced it quite a bit (I can recall it only partially, because I don't have any logs from that time since I started my own svn a while later. It covered e.g. Slony support that was broken as I found when using it). At the same time, you removed VC6 support, which I didn't realize immediately because I didn't contact svn for a while. When finally you understood the conditional compilation way I wanted to introduce, giving us back some common understanding, I tried to start to updating/committing and found my dev env f***ed up, with svn and my version severely diverged. Bummer. At that time I was heavily p***ed and decided that I could maintain my pgAdmin fork to my personal needs, and observing how fast I was removed from the pgAdmin team you seemed to like that. My offer to get and review my changes in order to extract them for the official pgAdmin never got an answer. Regards, Andreas
Andreas Pflug wrote: > OMG. Can you imagine I feel I can't use my own code as I wish? If it is all your own code then of course, you can do as you wish. But as I pointed out, the base classes you said you were using were originally based on other classes written by myself and others. > For peace sake, I added a reference to the version info. Thank you. > Depends on what you call "resolve" and "move on". > I'm not inclined to reread and quote the messages we exchanged back then > (most of them in private IIRC), so in short from my memory: > - you removed working code, replacing it with half-brewn wxGrid code > that had some bad behaviour. I used the query tool heavily, and rely on > it, and thus was annoyed seeing the main tool (at least temporarily) > degraded. To repeat, I'm exceptionally sensitive about the query tool > because it was the main reason to start work on pgAdmin. I know I made > this point very clear. You did. However, the code was not half-brewed, nor did it behave badly in any way that I'm aware of. It was thoroughly tested and has since proven to work well. > I recommitted the working stuff, leaving wxGrid code there for > conditional compilation, you removed it completely again. > > When finally you understood the conditional compilation way I wanted to > introduce, giving us back some common understanding, The reason I re-added the conditionals was to allow you the option of using that version of the code despite the fact I couldn't understand why it was so important to you. > I tried to start to > updating/committing and found my dev env f***ed up, with svn and my > version severely diverged. Bummer. > At that time I was heavily p***ed and decided that I could maintain my > pgAdmin fork to my personal needs, and observing how fast I was removed > from the pgAdmin team you seemed to like that. My offer to get and > review my changes in order to extract them for the official pgAdmin > never got an answer. I honestly never received such an email, and would have been glad to accept had I done. As for leaving the team, you unsubscribed from all the mailing lists and said something to the effect of 'I'm never going to work on pgAdmin again' which I took as a resignation from the team. If I misunderstood what you were saying, then I sincerely apologise and would be keen to put things right if you are willing. You were an extremely valued member of the team whose work was appreciated by hundreds of people, myself included. Regards, Dave.
Dave Page wrote: >> My offer to get and >> review my changes in order to extract them for the official pgAdmin >> never got an answer. >> > > I honestly never received such an email, and would have been glad to > accept had I done. As for leaving the team, you unsubscribed from all > the mailing lists and said something to the effect of 'I'm never going > to work on pgAdmin again' which I took as a resignation from the team. > > I investigated this point, and indeed you answered that mail (last year on Sep 19th). You didn't react to my code offer in that mail though. > If I misunderstood what you were saying, then I sincerely apologise and > would be keen to put things right if you are willing. Hm, I wonder what you mean by "put things right". Rereading those few mails from Sep'06, I found that all issues still apply. Actually, pgadmin design has shifted in a way I never would have accepted for good reasons (I called it "gui and usability foolishness" back then; it applies to 1.8 even stronger). I'm sure you do NOT know what I mean but there's certainly no point complaining about a tool I don't use. So if you want "to put things right" in order to have me entering the pgadmin project again, no chance. I'd stir up things in a way many people would dislike (apart from the fact that, in contrast to the situation when pgAdmin III was started, I DO have an admin tool that works for me, with everything I need so there's little motivation for me). When it's about anything non-pgadmin related, I only can repeat the last sentence of that old mail: "I'd still drink a beer with you, though." Regards, Andreas
Andreas Pflug wrote: > I investigated this point, and indeed you answered that mail (last year > on Sep 19th). You didn't react to my code offer in that mail though. In which case I can only assume I misread that part. > When it's about anything non-pgadmin related, I only can repeat the last > sentence of that old mail: > "I'd still drink a beer with you, though." Well in that case let's just not speak of the project again. Hopefully we'll get that beer at a future conference. Regards, Dave