From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Gaetano Mendola <mendola(at)bigfoot(dot)com> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Unsupported 3rd-party solutions (Was: Few questions |
Date: | 2004-08-23 18:35:32 |
Message-ID: | 20040823153509.M4215@ganymede.hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, 23 Aug 2004, Gaetano Mendola wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>> Csaba Nagy wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Bruce, if postgres is not a company and so on, why don't you open up the
>>> core development team to include some of the contributors who would like
>>> to include their product in the main distribution, and have a bundled
>>> product ? Cause a good data base is definitely not made up just by the
>>> core, but all the rest too. And I'm sure that there are many people out
>>> there who would use a PL/Java if they would find it in the main
>>> distribution, and that's all you have to do for this to happen: include
>>> it. Users of postgres are busy too, and some of them will never notice
>>> what they are missing.
>>> Now it's very clear to me that if all the extensions would be bundled,
>>> it would be too much, and that there's no "commitee" to steer what
>>> should go in or out... but then maybe a vote would help ? If the
>>> contributor wants it in the core, a vote of the interested would be
>>> quite relevant.
>>
>>
>> We are not adverse to someone taking the core db code, adding other
>> stuff, and making a new super distribution.
>
> And? Put it on www.postgresql.org ?
No ... put it on pgFoundry.org as a project there ...
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gaetano Mendola | 2004-08-23 18:48:14 | Re: Unsupported 3rd-party solutions (Was: Few questions |
Previous Message | Manfred Koizar | 2004-08-23 17:57:01 | Re: Table access method not behaving like Oracle (index vs sequential scan). Examples and stats provided. |