On Sun, Jan 5, 2020 at 5:39 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Looking at the stats, it's clear that it took a lot of code from other
> files, so it seems disingenuous to claim that it doesn't have even a
> single line that isn't copyrighted by UCB regents.
I took that claim at face value. Perhaps it was just an oversight.
But if it really wasn't, then it's not just "portions" of the
copyright that go to the PGDG.
> I think the easiest is to state that all files, even new files are
> Portions (c) each of these entities, period. Trying to distinguish code
> that's not even a single line derived from UCB Regents seems really
> labor-intensive.
That seems like a reasonable policy to me, outside of third-party code
that gets vendored into the tree. I am also in favor of being
conservative about this.
--
Peter Geoghegan