Chris Travers wrote:
> > Please stop looking at Afilias as a 3rd party. Afilias is a member of
> > the PGDG as everyone else. The problem that even people inside of this
> > community can't imagine a company being just a member of this team
> > doesn't mean that it is impossible.
> While you have a valid point from the perspective of the community, I
> think there is an issue which is legitimate here. That is that people
> see the fact that Slony does not come with the PostgreSQL tarball. From
> this perspective "we" do not have a "replication" solution. Like it or
> not, this is a viewpoint many evaluators have. To them, this is still a
> third-party add-on, even though it was developed primarily by core
> members of the PostgreSQL community.
> How do we combat this issue? Do we release Slony with PostgreSQL? Does
> that really make sense (the general concensus seems to be "no")? Do we
> release a different distribution of PostgreSQL which includes Slony? I
> think that this would be a good idea, but....
> Also, will it be possible to see a Win32 port of Slony at some point?
Why would Slony _not_ work on Win32? Has anyone tested it?
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
In response to
pgsql-advocacy by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2004-08-14 21:33:43|
|Subject: Re: Time to work on Press Release 8.0|
|Previous:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2004-08-14 20:28:35|
|Subject: Re: Guidlines for a PostgreSQL Speech/Tutorial|