Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Hmmm... On second read, that seems ambiguous.
> It was purposely ambiguous.
I was afraid of that.
> It did not use any Ingres code, as told to me by Jolly, I think. My
> book has Ingres mentioned as an "ancestor" of Postgres.
I have e-mailed Doc again, asking him to remove the 'direct' in the line
'Ingres was the direct ancestor of PostgreSQL' -- direct implies, IMO,
shared code. Thanks for clarifying, Bruce...
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11