Re: Trimming the Fat, Part Deux ...

On Fri, 2 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:

> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> >> Ummm ... stupid question, but can we even bring this into the 'core'?
> >>
> >> You may distribute under the terms of either the GNU General Public
> >> License or the Artistic License, as specified in the Perl README file.
>
> > Artistic License is fine, I think.
>
> The Artistic License is cool, but it's not BSD. Are we going to drop
> our recent agreement to try to move the distribution to all-BSD terms
> so easily?

that's kinda what I'm wondering ... but, as someone else already asked
also, is there a reason why we are even bringing this into the
distirbution, vs, say, moving it to GBorg? I do like the ability for us
to modify the code itself, but haven't put it into the repository yet
since at least one person (or was it two?) questioned whether it should
even be in there ...

Personally, I'd love to put it into GBorg and have someone assigned as a
maintainer for any patch submissions, or someone that wants to actively
work on it ...