Return-Path: owner-postman Received: from faerie.CS.Berkeley.EDU (faerie.CS.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.37.53]) by nobozo.CS.Berkeley.EDU (8.6.9/8.6.3) with ESMTP id PAA08450 for ; Fri, 9 Dec 1994 15:35:11 -0800 Received: from localhost.Berkeley.EDU (localhost.Berkeley.EDU [127.0.0.1]) by faerie.CS.Berkeley.EDU (8.6.9/8.1B) with SMTP id PAA14988; Fri, 9 Dec 1994 15:35:09 -0800 Message-Id: <199412092335.PAA14988@faerie.CS.Berkeley.EDU> X-Authentication-Warning: faerie.CS.Berkeley.EDU: Host localhost.Berkeley.EDU didn't use HELO protocol From: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) To: postgres-arch@postgres.Berkeley.EDU Reply-To: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) Subject: [wpp@marie.physik.tu-berlin.de: New Linux diff's ?] Date: Fri, 09 Dec 94 15:35:02 -0800 Sender: aoki@postgres.Berkeley.EDU X-Mts: smtp ------- Forwarded Message From: wpp@marie.physik.tu-berlin.de (Kai Petzke) To: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU Subject: Re: New Linux diff's ? Date: Sat, 9 Jul 1994 22:15:47 +0200 (MET DST) > > wpp@marie.physik.tu-berlin.de (Kai Petzke) writes: > > If I ever manage to download that file, I will do so and "declare > > ownership". I will release the code back to the public, this time > > under the GPL, which allows a wider use than the current Copyright > > of Postgres. > > hmm. i'm not a legal type, but it's not clear to me that it's > kosher to change the license condition of the basic distribution > like that. by "declare ownership" i meant set up shop as the > mainline development site. before trying to weaken the existing > copyright, i would check with a lawyer. I misunderstood you. Sorry. I read your statement "declare ownership" as "declare ownership of the code". This is for example true for public domain software, you may grap it, and say, that it is yours. I understood you, that Berkeley abondons the project, giving away their code into the public domain. I must not weaken the copyright of Postgres. That's law. Nevertheless, I am looking for an agreement, which fits both sides. My situation is: Currently, everybody who uses postgres not for educational/research/non-profit purposes has to contact your University. So everybody who uses postgres for storage of commercial data has to contact your University. I vote for two additional terms: - Using Postgres for data storage/retrieval is explicitely allowed, no matter, what the data was. - The libpq library may be linked to commercial software. I do not know your situation, eg. the research contracts made for Postgres, or how much money you earn from commercial users. I guess, though, that Stonebraker will not like the idea of a freeware concurrent to Montage. My problem is, that I have nothing to give. All I have done so far was to correct some prototypes, make Postgres run under a new operating system, fix a handfull bugs and answer a few questions on the Postgres list. What do you think? Kai ------- End of Forwarded Message -- Paul M. Aoki | University of California at Berkeley aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU | Dept. of EECS, Computer Science Division (#1776) | Berkeley, CA 94720-1776