Hi, On 2018-07-07 19:12:58 +0200, David Fetter wrote: > On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 01:15:15AM +0000, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote: > > I believe that accepting patented code from companies would be > > practically more useful for PostgreSQL enhancement and growth. > > PostgreSQL is now a mature software, and it can be more > > corporate-friendly like other software under Apache License. > > The Apache license is "friendly" to the patent holder, not so much to > the aspiring maker of derivative proprietary software.
I don't think that's a true characterization. There's no meaningful reduction in freedoms to make derivative proprietary software in of apache 2 vs BSD/MIT like licenses. It gives you additional rights. Are you talking about the retaliatory clause? If so, that only cancel the patent license, not the entire license. > We went with a very liberal license from the outset for what we > believed were good reasons, and that's served us well over the > decades. If you're proposing a change of this magnitude, it's going > to have to be a lot more convincing than, "it would be convenient for > my company this year." It's entirely possible to dual license contributions and everything. Why are you making such aggressive statements about a, so far, apparently good faith engagement? Greetings, Andres Freund
