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

Re: Unsupported 3rd-party solutions (Was: Few questions on postgresql

From: Thomas Hallgren <thhal(at)mailblocks(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Unsupported 3rd-party solutions (Was: Few questions on postgresql
Date: 2004-08-22 18:00:34
Message-ID: 4128DF42.6020601@mailblocks.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general
Tom,
> Supported by *whom* exactly?  It won't be the core committee; we have
> more than enough to do managing the server itself.
> 
I don't doubt that for a second. What I'm suggesting must be staffed 
somehow. The core committee must be involved though or the whole idea 
falls apart. You *are* PostgreSQL (at least to me).

> Whoever is actually doing this "verifying" and "supporting" can take
> on the work of producing the "supported configuration" package too;
> IMHO it would really be pretty meaningless to do otherwise.
> 
Agree.

> I think the place where this most naturally falls is with the commercial
> Linux distributors (Red Hat, Suse, etc).  They're already in the
> business of assembling disparate upstream sources and making sure those
> bits play nicely together.
> 
Here I don't agree. It's very important that the packaging is made by 
PostgreSQL. I'm not contributing PL/Java for the benefit of Red Hat or 
Suse. I'm doing it because I want to improve the database. Also, when a 
Solaris or Windows customer wants a database solution, it's higly 
unlikely that they'd consult a commercial Linux distributor.

Regards,

Thomas Hallgren



In response to

Responses

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Christopher BrowneDate: 2004-08-22 19:05:57
Subject: Re: Unsupported 3rd-party solutions (Was: Few questions on postgresql
Previous:From: Thomas HallgrenDate: 2004-08-22 17:52:10
Subject: Re: Unsupported 3rd-party solutions (Was: Few questions

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