On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:08 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 2010-06-25 at 00:00 +0300, Allan Kamau wrote: > >> >> Seems akp would like to hide/protect (including his name) his hard >> earned code/IP which may have consumed some man-hours, which to run, >> requires well built and generously given PostgreSQL code which has >> taken man-decades to develop. And what is wrong with that? PostgreSQL has a licence that is intended to work well with open and closed source works, and it is up to the individual user to decide how they want to licence their apps built on it. > I have no problem with him trying to protect his hard earned work. I > just think he is trying to solve the wrong problem. It's a real problem faced by many businesses and solved by most commercial DBMSs. Of course, it's basically impossible to solve in the Open Source world, as there's nowhere to hide a key or obfuscation algorithm. If akp geek is able to use EnterpriseDB builds of Postgres, then he may want to look at PL/Secure, which will obfuscate his pl/pgsql code: http://www.enterprisedb.com/products/pl_secure_standard_server.do -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
