On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 08:36:49PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > >>>I doubt we want to rip it out without some suitable > >>>replacement -- do we? > >>> > >>> > >> > >>That's more than 10 years ago. I remember creating this for my then work > >>at the North Carolina State Highway Patrol and sending it to Joe, but > >>that's about the extent of my recollection. > >> > >>If the Artistic License isn't acceptable. I guess we'd have to try to > >>get the code relicensed, or reimplement the function ourselves. There > >>are numerous implementations out there we could copy from or use as a > >>basis for reimplementation, including several licensed under the Apache > >>2.0 license - is that compatible with ours? > > > >Perhaps a company large enough to have in-house counsel > >(EnterpriseDB?) could get a quick legal opinion on the license > >before we start pursuing other things? Perhaps this is just a > >non-issue... > > > The first para above was written by Dave Page, who works for EDB ....
Where are we on this? -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
