On 05/28/2013 11:32 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > I think Simon has a good point, as VMWare has asserted patents on some > changes to their version of Postgres in the past, so if the copyright
... which I'll point out that they *didn't* contribute, and which may yet get resolved in a way that benefits the PostgreSQL community. > mentions VMWare, we can't assume it is patent-free. Just the fact you > had to check with the VMware legal department verifies there is cause > for concern about things coming from VMWare. That seems rather like a catch-22 Bruce. If they don't check with the legal department, it's dangerous, but if they do check, it's dangerous? Presumably if they checked with the legal department, it's cleared. We should be wary of stuff contributed by company employees who *didn't* check. This particular tool seems highly unlikely to be legitimately patentable, anyway. There's too much prior art. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
