Hey!
I'm glad today to launch the PostGIS Add-ons. This new PostGIS extension aims
at providing a quick, more Agile way to release pure PL/pgSQL functions
developed by the PostGIS user community. It includes 15 new functions. Among
them, two functions to aggregate raster/vector overlay statisti
Very cool idea.
I have a lot of plpgsql functions.
One more detail : what about licenses?
Cheers,
Rémi-C
2013/11/18 Pierre Racine
> Hey!
>
> I'm glad today to launch the PostGIS Add-ons. This new PostGIS extension
> aims at providing a quick, more Agile way to release pure PL/pgSQL
> function
f Of Rémi Cura
> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2013 11:49 AM
> To: PostGIS Users Discussion
> Subject: Re: [postgis-users] The first release of the PostGIS Add-ons is out!
>
> Very cool idea.
> I have a lot of plpgsql functions.
>
> One more detail : what about licenses?
&g
On 18 November 2013 16:57, Pierre Racine wrote:
> Should be the same as PostGIS (GPL). I will add license notice in the next
> release (very soon!).
If I were you, I'd make use MIT.
Best regards,
--
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
___
post
).
>
> Pierre
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: postgis-users-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:postgis-users-
> > boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Rémi Cura
> > Sent: Monday, November 18, 2013 11:49 AM
> > To: PostGIS Users Discussion
> > Subjec
t;>
>> Pierre
>>
>> > -Original Message-
>> > From: postgis-users-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:postgis-users-
>> > boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Rémi Cura
>> > Sent: Monday, November 18, 2013 11:49 AM
>> > To: Po
Humm.. Lots of requirements...
> Sorry for the license, I needed a clear answer :-) I personnaly would prefere
> LGPL, like postgres.
Doesn't seems like a good idea to make it different than PostGIS. How is LGPL
different from LPG? I'm a license ignorant.
> can you consider to use a template d
On 18 November 2013 17:13, Pierre Racine wrote:
> I'm a license ignorant.
Release it into the public domain and
include a statement that you release all rights
adding "No rights reserved".
Best regards,
--
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
__
On 11/18/2013 12:20 PM, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
On 18 November 2013 17:13, Pierre Racine wrote:
I'm a license ignorant.
Release it into the public domain and
include a statement that you release all rights
adding "No rights reserved".
Best regards,
+1 on this because it is the most friendly
About license :
if you use GPL function, your code becomes GPL, this might be a problem if
using it inside company.
If you use LGPL, you can do basically what you want.
Using PostGIS everyday, I already find it hard to find the functions I
need. I feel there is no point to provide additionnal func
Rémi,
> About license :
> if you use GPL function, your code becomes GPL, this might be a problem if
> using it inside company.
> If you use LGPL, you can do basically what you want.
I think about going like Mateusz and Stephen suggested. What do you think?
> Using PostGIS everyday, I already fi
Pierre,
Regarding the issue of the repository becoming a mess of unmanaged code
in the over time, we had the same issue in pgRouting and took the follow
approach.
Rather than try to be the aggregator of the code submissions, we decided
to become an index for them. We created a wiki page that
Thanks Stephen for these suggestions,
> Rather than try to be the aggregator of the code submissions, we decided
> to become an index for them. We created a wiki page that would allow
> people to place a short description of what they provide and a link to
> github gist or project.
So they are no
On 11/18/2013 2:53 PM, Pierre Racine wrote:
Thanks Stephen for these suggestions,
Rather than try to be the aggregator of the code submissions, we
decided to become an index for them. We created a wiki page that
would allow people to place a short description of what they
provide and a link to
Le 11/18/2013 12:25 PM, Stephen Woodbridge a écrit :
On 11/18/2013 12:20 PM, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
On 18 November 2013 17:13, Pierre Racine
wrote:
I'm a license ignorant.
Release it into the public domain and
include a statement that you release all rights
adding "No rights reserved".
Best
ussion
> Subject: Re: [postgis-users] The first release of the PostGIS Add-ons is out!
>
> Le 11/18/2013 12:25 PM, Stephen Woodbridge a écrit :
> > On 11/18/2013 12:20 PM, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
> >> On 18 November 2013 17:13, Pierre Racine
>
> >> wrote:
> >&g
...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Pierre Racine
> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2013 1:45 PM
> To: PostGIS Users Discussion
> Subject: Re: [postgis-users] The first release of the PostGIS Add-ons is out!
>
> I knew we would fall into a license nightmare... So far we've got sugg
; Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2013 1:45 PM
> > To: PostGIS Users Discussion
> > Subject: Re: [postgis-users] The first release of the PostGIS Add-ons is
> out!
> >
> > I knew we would fall into a license nightmare... So far we've got
> suggestions
> > for &quo
> IMHO, It's fine (actually wonderful) that postgis is in the GPL, it protects
> the
> project and does not really limit its use in any substantive way. It's big
> enough to stand on its own. But re: #2 GPL would limit the wide use of
> these scripts.
How would GPL limit the wide use of these s
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 02:13:04PM -0500, Pierre Racine wrote:
> I bend toward GPL in any case...
+1 for GPL "version 2 or later"
Same license that applies to PostGIS.
--strk;
___
postgis-users mailing list
postgis-users@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.os
Oh, I prefer GPL, and in this case, since it's uncompiled code it probably
doesn't matter. I just know lots of people belly ache about the GPL, so
I'm trying to insert that perspective... . :)
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Pierre Racine
wrote:
> > IMHO, It's fine (actually wonderful) that p
On 11/19/2013 2:42 PM, Pierre Racine wrote:
IMHO, It's fine (actually wonderful) that postgis is in the GPL, it
protects the project and does not really limit its use in any
substantive way. It's big enough to stand on its own. But re: #2
GPL would limit the wide use of these scripts.
How wou
> 1. If it is GPL and I add it to my code them my code has to be licensed
> undr GPL. This is problematic for most business. If I have a proprietary
> product that I'm spent 100's of thousands of hours to develop and
> believe that it is critical to my success, there is no way that I can
> afford t
> Its your code, pick the one you want.
>
>
+1. If there was one true answer to the licensing question, this would be
it.
-bborie
___
postgis-users mailing list
postgis-users@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
Sorry to be a little bit late in the discussion, but in my opinion, there
are really two sensible solutions:
1) Use the most simple and liberal (permissive) license. No license is not
an option, since it means copyright by default, and public domain is not a
good option due to specific issues
Hi,
Sorry for complicating things.
Le mardi 19 novembre 2013 21:48:11, Pierre Racine a écrit :
> > 1. If it is GPL and I add it to my code them my code has to be licensed
> > undr GPL. This is problematic for most business. If I have a proprietary
> > product that I'm spent 100's of thousands of h
ily GPL".
Does that make sense? Does that exist?
Pierre
> -Original Message-
> From: Vincent Picavet [mailto:vincent...@oslandia.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2013 5:58 PM
> To: postgis-users@lists.osgeo.org
> Cc: Pierre Racine
> Subject: Re: [postgis-users] The f
> I would have gone with a license saying "You can modify and redistribute as
> long as the derived work is also under an open license, not necessarily GPL".
> Does that make sense? Does that exist?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTFPL
Best regards,
--
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
t
> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 9:52 AM
> To: PostGIS Users Discussion
> Subject: Re: [postgis-users] The first release of the PostGIS Add-ons is out!
>
> > I would have gone with a license saying "You can modify and redistribute
> as long as the derived work i
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 09:56:56AM -0500, Pierre Racine wrote:
> Not really the same thing as I said... ;-)
>
> I would prefer "You just DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT TO as long as it stay
> open..."
That's GPL, really. The only reason for people NOT to like it is
when they want to craft some piece
There is a very big difference between :' i tweak one of your function, so
my tweak must be open source' and 'i use one of your function, so my code
must be open source'.
Unfortunately GPL imposes both.
Cheers,
Rémi-C
2013/11/20 Sandro Santilli
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 09:56:56AM -0500, Pie
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/20/13 16:14, Sandro Santilli wrote:
> That's GPL, really. The only reason for people NOT to like it is
> when they want to craft some piece of closed source and still use
> what you send out to the world as an open component.
+1:
* PostGIS is G
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Il 20/11/2013 16:32, Rémi Cura ha scritto:
> There is a very big difference between :' i tweak one of your function, so my
> tweak
> must be open source' and 'i use one of your function, so my code must be open
> source'.
>
> Unfortunately GPL impos
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 04:32:12PM +0100, Rémi Cura wrote:
> There is a very big difference between :' i tweak one of your function, so
> my tweak must be open source' and 'i use one of your function, so my code
> must be open source'.
>
> Unfortunately GPL imposes both.
It's not unfortunate, it'
This is not as simple,
Many open source software are not GPL (starting from standard implementing
api ),
including postgres !
GPL is not always the answer, and here I don't think it is.
For me it should be a more open license, and the project should be hosted
on the postgis github.
Cheers,
Rémi
Hi,
> > I would prefer "You just DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT TO as long as it stay
> > open..."
>
> That's GPL, really. The only reason for people NOT to like it is
> when they want to craft some piece of closed source and still use
> what you send out to the world as an open component.
Another re
On Nov 20, 2013, at 3:48 PM, Pierre Racine wrote:
Salut Pierre,
> Thanks Vincent for this input.
>
> I'll go for GPL for now as it's that a nightmare to change afterward if,
> really, someone complains.
I'm agree with Remi and Vincent points.
And i don't see there, any coming code valuable en
37 matches
Mail list logo
