Re: [HACKERS] Commercial binary support?

Josh Berkus wrote:
> Josh, Hans, et. al.
>
> Please take this thread OFF LIST IMMEDIATELY.
>
> Its content is no longer appropriate for the Hackers mailing list, and we get
> enough traffic. Flamewars are not a part of our community.

[ Moved to advocacy.]

Let me try to get this discussion on the right track. Joshua Drake is
saying some companies want a commercial version of PostgreSQL so they
have someone to support it, while Hans is saying that makes it sound
like Command Prompt is the only one supporting PostgreSQL.

Hans, I don't see Josh Drake saying that having a commercial release of
PostgreSQL is _required_ for a company to support PostgreSQL. In fact,
he supports source installs of PostgreSQL too. He is only saying that
some people prefer a commercial version of PostgreSQL because they
_think_ they will get better support. I know that might not make sense,
but open source is new to lots of people so maybe it makes them more
comfortable. In fact, if you go into a site and install PostgreSQL,
they might think you are installing _your_ version of PostgreSQL, while
in fact is it the source version of PostgreSQL.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073