Re: Subject: Re: [GENERAL] A book for PgSQL? A need? yes? no?

On Fri, 12 Feb 1999, Gene Selkov Jr. wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 Feb 1999, Stephan Doliov wrote:
> > [snip likes holding books in hand and sniffing moldy pages]
>
> Good point, but for any argument there are counter-arguments, and it is
> sometimes so tempting to throw in a few good ones!
> [snip litany of reasons that books are a pain]

good points also. maybe we don't need/want O'Reilly. that's OK.
certainly having something that can be zapped to kinkos and bound to user
specs is wonderful. that way the only people who really want booklike
stuff will have it and no publisher gets stuck with inventory of
unsaleable material. but there is the mindshare factor. an O'Reilly book
on the shelves would lend a lot of credibility to postgres (as if it
needed any). and that would probably be worthwhile. maybe someone is
interested in writing/editing and a target would be to publish when
postgres has pk/fk support, left and right joins and a few other features.

$0.02,
steve