On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 01:27:13AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 04:47:35AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Therefore, I caution people from viewing the Greenplum source code as > > you might see patented ideas that could be later implemented in > > Postgres, opening Postgres up to increased patent violation problems. I > > am also concerned about existing community members who work for > > Pivotal/Greenplum and therefore are required to view the patented source > > code. The license issue might eventually be improved by > > Pivotal/Greenplum, but, for now, I think caution is necessary. > > > > Of course, never mention known-patented ideas in any community forum, > > including this email list. > > I just found out that Citus Data has patent applications pending, so > viewing Citus Data source code has the same problems as Greenplum.
Actually, it might only be their closed source software that contains patents, i.e. not pg_shard. I will check and report back when I can unless someone else reports here first. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Roman grave inscription + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
