Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Adding fulldisjunctions to the contrib

From: "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "Tzahi Fadida" <Tzahi(dot)ML(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Adding fulldisjunctions to the contrib
Date: 2006-08-27 02:24:29
Message-ID: 36e682920608261924l260bc5a4yd4a0cf0a4d5bf7b3@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
On 8/26/06, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> Your attitude has been lacking about this whole thing, as has a lot of
> other people. PgFoundry is the official sub project site for PostgreSQL.

That may be the case.  However, all I've seen+heard is conjecture that
pgfoundry is a good thing; where's the proof?  Show me and other
fellow "whiners" that a lot of people use pgfoundry and I'll gladly
shut up about it.

> It is not a graveyard, projects on PgFoundry should receive full
> advocacy and promotion about their abilities and their linkage PostgreSQL.

See previous email to Andrew regarding projects that don't work with
the latest versions of PostgreSQL.  I think I've even seen a pgfoundry
project last updated for 7.x; that's certainly the case for gborg.

> If we spent half as much time promoting and helping the various sub
> project succeed as we doing whining on this list, we would be far more
> dominant in the industry then we are.

So, subprojects [pgfoundry] is the source of all industry dominance?
I wish I would've known that before :)  Sorry, I was itchin' to say
it.

> I am sick of all the moaning that goes on,

So am I... in general.

> When full disjunctons is ready, I am sure it will be considered for
> core. It currently is not and pgFoundry is the perfect place for until
> until then.

As it's not a common feature, I don't think many of the hackers know
what it is or what it does.  Certainly, very few have spoken on this
thread.

It's odd, only 10 people have commented on this thread; 4 of which are
core members, 2 in favor and 2 against.  Yet, we're having an argument
on why this wasn't included.  Unless this is the new math, 2 vs. 2
seems like a tie to me.

> We can still promote and announce we have a full disjunctions
> implementation, just as we can advertise we have full text indexing.

Wherever it ends up, I look forward to seeing the promotion and
announcements.  Tzahi has put a lot of work into it over the past few
months.

I'm done on this topic but would gladly appreciate public or private
proof regarding pgfoundry's popularity.

-- 
Jonah H. Harris, Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1300
EnterpriseDB Corporation            | fax: 732.331.1301
33 Wood Ave S, 2nd Floor            | jharris(at)enterprisedb(dot)com
Iselin, New Jersey 08830            | http://www.enterprisedb.com/

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2006-08-27 02:35:01
Subject: Re: Hierarchical Queries--Status
Previous:From: Matthew T. O'ConnorDate: 2006-08-27 02:08:19
Subject: Re: [Pgsqlrpms-hackers] Safer auto-initdb for RPM init

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2006-08-27 02:35:01
Subject: Re: Hierarchical Queries--Status
Previous:From: Jonah H. HarrisDate: 2006-08-27 02:07:57
Subject: Re: Adding fulldisjunctions to the contrib

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group