Re: inclusions WAS: Increased company involvement

Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> I'm not saying pgfoundry should be shut down. But trying to force
> projects out into the sterile landscape where they get little use and
> little support is a death warrant. And unnecessary.

> I think what I would suggest is going through pgfoundry, and checking in the
> stable release of any good looking project into the contrib directory of the
> Postgres distribution.

In other words, decide that pgfoundry is a dead end that will never
work, and so instead we'll load that maintenance effort back onto the
core developers.

NO, THANK YOU.

It's entirely likely that we haven't figured out how to make pgfoundry
work yet. But figure it out we must, or the project-as-a-whole will die
of its own weight. Not everything can be part of the core.

This isn't directly applicable to the PLs, since those are large efforts
(and thereby relatively few in number) and they tend to have very
high-bandwidth linkages to the core server. But to treat everything as
having those same needs is a recipe for failure.

regards, tom lane