john.bender@xxxxxxxxxxxx writes: > There are a few obstinate anti-open source customers though, that > prevent my plan from moving forward. They've bought into whatever > hype they've read and just simply say no. Now, that said, they're > fairly non-technical and probably had never heard of PostgreSQL > before we presented our plan. > > So, is it a little shady to want to slide PostgreSQL in under the > radar? I'm simply trying to downplay what it is...it's my take that > what they don't know won't hurt them. Well, I have seen SAP AG deploy stuff like Ghostscript and Apache (under their various varying license) as components of their applications without anyone saying "boo." In SAPGUI, the "front end," they had parts of Ghostscript in there, complete with copyright messages and everything. But since all of this stuff was "stowed" in a subdirectory that they didn't really call attention to, nobody generally notices. I would imagine that if you simply stow components where you choose to stow them, and say, "this is part of what we always install for all our customers," and never bring OSS up as an issue, they probably won't notice they were going to have an issue with it. For these people, you don't say, "Oh yes, this is open source; you're agreeing to the BSDL." Instead, the "story" is more like: "We have acquired proper licensing rights for all of the subcomponents that we use from their respective producers and vendors." -- "cbbrowne","@","cbbrowne.com" http://cbbrowne.com/info/spreadsheets.html I knew you weren't really interested. -- Marvin the Paranoid Android ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
