Hi, > Most of our code uses or is inspired by PostgreSQL's code, in some modified > form or another. Additionally, we try to have our code work tightly with > their code in order to reduce replication of code. As a core developer, and > from your input, I wouldn't be comfortable with anything less than including > PostgreSQL's license (along with ASF) in nearly all of our source files - to > be safe. Would this be satisfactory to you?
That would be safe I guess, but would it be accurate? I also don’t think that is in line with ASF policy on file headers. In general, code developed at the ASF should have an ASF header, 3rd party code or code copied from elsewhere should have the original header on it. Is it that hard to work out what code was copied and what code was not? > My understanding of what you are saying about the Bitnine license is to leave > it out. As Bitnine donated this code to ASF and merely stating it in the > LICENSE or NOTICE file should be sufficient. Would this be satisfactory to > you? As per ASF policy it should be mentioned in NOTICE. Kind Regards, Justin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
