Message-ID: <47138DA3.7090801@postgresql.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 16:56:19 +0100
From: Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Macintosh/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
CC: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>,
	pgsql-www@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Approval process for news/events/training is broken
References: <470A72CD.4050304@agliodbs.com>
	<200710120001.50415.josh@agliodbs.com>
	<470F3F7B.4030904@postgresql.org>
	<200710141454.44871.josh@agliodbs.com>
	<47131C0A.8070206@postgresql.org>
	<20071015081927.GB4653@svr2.hagander.net>
	<471326F3.8090004@postgresql.org>
	<471387D3.2070002@commandprompt.com>
In-Reply-To: <471387D3.2070002@commandprompt.com>
OpenPGP: url=http://www.pgadmin.org/pgp/davepage.pgp
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
>> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 08:51:38AM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
>>>> Josh Berkus wrote:
>>>>> Dave, all:
>>> Also, looking back at the news just added today, is "EnterpriseDB
>>> Postgres"
>>> considered a "postgresql family product" or a commercial one? Maybe a
>>> guidance bullet on "downstream distributions"?
>>
>> It's certainly not commercial, but yes that does seem worth clarifying.
> 
> It depends on what you are meaning by "commercial". This is a common
> problem amongst FOSS people. FOSS can be commercial. I would actually
> argue that EnterpriseDB Postgres *is* commercial as it is backed and
> supported by a *commercial* Enterprise.
> 
> The real question is, "is it proprietary". If it is even partially
> closed source then it really doesn't belong in the "postgresql family
> product" unless we also include MPP and Replicator.

You know what I mean :-). And all of EDB-Postgres is open source,
including the funky little MySQL migrator tool in the latest builds.

/D