On 8/12/15 9:32 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote:
* Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote:
Interesting. Do you mind if I pick up from it some ideas for the
in-core replication test suite based on TAP stuff? That's still in the
works for the next CF.
Certainly don't mind at all, entirely open source under the MIT
license.
Why not the PG license? It would be nicer if we didn't have to worry
about license contamination here.
There are actually a few reasons I chose the MIT license:
1) It's one of the most permissive licenses around.
2) I originally had plans to extend backrest to other database systems.
Nearly two years into development I don't think that sounds like a
great idea anymore but it was the original plan.
3) It's common for GitHub projects and backrest has lived there its
entire life.
I'm not against a license change in theory though I can't see why it
matters very much.
--
-David
da...@pgmasters.net
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
