Re: [Postgres-xc-general] License of Postgres-XC related documents and contents

[Michael P. <mic...@gm...>]

On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 1:36 AM, Joshua D. Drake <jd...@co...>wrote:

>
> On 07/21/2012 01:01 PM, Mason Sharp wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 10:00 PM, Koichi Suzuki
> > <koi...@gm...> wrote:
> >> As Mason suggested, I think it's safer to begin with non-commercial
> >> license.   Commercial use can be licensed in case-by-case basis and we
> >> should license as long as the use helps XC.   There could be many
> >> different commercial use and I'm not sure if the commercial license
> >> helps XC in many corner cases.
> >>
> >
> > Actually, I just meant that I think anything created by the
> > "Postgres-XC Development Group" as a whole should allow liberal usage
> > (whatever license that would be), including commercial use, and that
> > if someone creates something and wants some restrictions, they should
> > do it under their own name or company. Isn't that similar to the
> > PostgreSQL community?
>
> Well PostgreSQL is 100% BSD (docs included) so.... you can pretty much
> do whatever you want.
>
> >  If the others in the XC community wants to go a
> > different route, that's fine, I just hope it does not become overly
> > bureaucratic.
>
> Agreed, which is why I suggested keeping our hands clean but forcing the
> good community-citizen approach with attribution.
>
On this point I kind of agree, everything that is labelled as "Postgres-XC
development group" should be based on the same license as the code to
facilitate all the things.
However, docs written by guys not using Postgres-XC development group name
on their docs but a personal name or company name can provide the license
they want and if other people want to pick up those documents they need to
contact the authors. This is for example the case of my own presentation
documents. Those docs are under non-commercial as I use on them my company
name and my own name.
-- 
Michael Paquier
http://michael.otacoo.com