Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> As Tom (I believe) has stated, and both Bruce/I have said over and
> over again ... this is nothing stop'ng a group of ppl starting up a
> "bundled postgresql" project, and dedicating their time and effort
> into building something up ...
> As Peter has stated, he had thought of this in the past, and felt it
> was easier/better for the various OS distributions to do it on their
> own ...
> In fact, Linux and FreeBSD *both* already deal with this in their
> RPM/ports collections ... and, in fact, on the FreeBSD side, smaller
> is better then larger, so that packager maintainers don't hvae to
> download a 12Meg file to get a 1Meg port out of it ...
Bruce Momjian wrote:
>We are not adverse to someone taking the core db code, adding other
>stuff, and making a new super distribution.
Your customers and many of your contributors would really like to see
PostgreSQL become more then just the core backend. A Redhat bundle is
great if your'e a Redhat user. If you are on another platform however,
it's no good to you. And some bundle from "a group of ppl" or "someone"?
No, sorry, that won't cut it either. It's just not the same thing at all.
In response to
pgsql-general by date
|Next:||From: Scott Marlowe||Date: 2004-08-23 20:20:15|
|Subject: Re: database troubles - various errors|
|Previous:||From: Thomas Hallgren||Date: 2004-08-23 20:03:00|
|Subject: Re: Unsupported 3rd-party solutions (Was: Few questions|