this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2023
9 points (100.0% liked)
PostgreSQL
658 readers
1 users here now
The world's most advanced open source relational database
Project
- About (history)
- Docs
- Donate to PostgreSQL
- Wiki
- Planet PostgreSQL
- IRC
- Mailing lists:
- pgsql-announce
- pgsql-hackers (developers)
- pgsql-general
- pgsql-jobs
- User Groups
Events
- SEAPUG Summer BBQ, 6 July in Seattle
- SFBA PostgreSQL Meetup, 12 July
- Chicago PostgreSQL Meetup, 19 July
- PGDay UK 2023, 12 September in London
- PGConf 2023, 3-5 October in New York City
- PGDay Israel 2023, 19 October
- PGConf.EU 2023, 12-15 December in Prague
Podcasts
Related Fediverse communities
- c/SQL on programming.dev
- #sql on Mastodon
- #postgresql on Mastodon
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Interesting! I had no idea about this fork.
But, seriously what is "open source but not open contribution"!? One of the main byproducts of the open source way is that if you think your ideas are not being heard, you can simply fork away. It looks like the author was referring to the fact that the way SQLite is governed, corporates cannot financially sponsor in exchange for project steering rights π€·ββοΈ
It's probably just me but that weird yet intentional wording made me lose interest in the actual offering π
My understanding is that sqlite simply doesn't accept outside contribution... source If you want to extend it anyway, you're basically required to fork (or pay for the consortium membership of 120k/yr and ask them to develop the features...)
From the link:
So now I see. Since the project is in public domain there's no copyright/left around it. And if you want to contribute, you need to sign a paper that says you're dedicating your patch to the public domain.
Nonetheless, I had the wrong idea of how SQLite is governed π€¦ Thanks for the refresher and the link π