Re: Democracy and organisation : let's make a revolution

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> James Hubbard wrote:
>
>>I don't normally post to this list, but have a crazy suggestion that is a
>>little farfetched.
>>
>>Suggestion:
>>Fix the portability problems so that there is a Windows native version of
>>PostgreSQL. Then offer the Open Office organization PostgreSQL as the
>>project's database. This would increase the user base my leaps and bounds.
>
>
> OK, we just started heavy discussion on this and I believe a few people
> are actively working on this. The timeframe is 3-6 months, though we
> have the Cygwin solution right now.

I've been watching the activity around this. I have a great deal of hope that
this will produce something. My wife needed a database and web scripting
solution for use on Windows at work and my only suggestion was to use mysql and
php. The binaries are on the website and are easy to download and install.

>
>>The problem is that using and administrating PostgreSQL can be complex. Also,
>>some people may automatically assume that PostgreSQL is a low end database not
>>capable of doing more than being used as a backend for a free office app. Of
>>course we all know better.
>
>
> OK, I have heard this before, but I would like to know specifically how
> is PostgreSQL harder to administer than MySQL. Knowing that will help
> us address the issue.
>
I wasn't really comparing to MySQL here. I meant, in relationship to MS
Access. Start it up and it just works. No worries about configuration files,
etc. I've not used MySQL before except to install it on Windows NT in a VMWare
session. I've been meaning to get back around to playing with to see how well
it functions.

The company that my wife works for is almost exclusively MS. There are a few
file servers that are Novell. I'm sure that the only reason that they are
using MySQL is that it's easy to obtain install and use and use with PHP.

>
>>Maybe a PostgreSQL-Lite would be a better idea. One that condenses the main
>>code down to something easy, that a desktop user could use, but maintain the
>>strength of the core code. I suppose that means creating another project.
>
>
> Perhaps a config utility that asked you questions and modified template1
> and the config files. How about that?
>
I think that would work pretty well. A basic configuration that locks eveything
down with the goal of a single user desktop setting, but also provides the user
with the capability of opening things up so that it could function as a
multiuser system. That then forces the issue of being able to move the
database to a server machine relatively painlessly.

Keep in mind that I was primarily focusing on the potential to include it with
something like OpenOffice. This is why I said that my post was a little far
fetched.

James Hubbard