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

Re: Git Repository for WITH RECURSIVE and others

From: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: "David Fetter" <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Cc: "Magnus Hagander" <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, "PG Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Git Repository for WITH RECURSIVE and others
Date: 2008-06-30 15:12:32
Message-ID: 87d4lz9ctb.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
"David Fetter" <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:

> Please explain your reasoning here.  The project has taken nasty hits
> on its infrastructure already (pgfoundry) because the author of the
> software had a go-it-alone, I-know-best attitude that sooner than
> later forced us to fork.  As a direct consequence, pgfoundry now needs
> a redo that will take a pgfoundry administrator many of work in their
> "ample spare time."
>
> Let's not cause more pinch points here.

Well sure, but I'm not sure the software used to distribute the program makes
the main difference there. I don't know much about the two programs, what
makes you think one is more of a go-it-alone style of development than the
other?

-- 
  Gregory Stark
  EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com
  Get trained by Bruce Momjian - ask me about EnterpriseDB's PostgreSQL training!

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2008-06-30 15:30:19
Subject: Re: Git Repository for WITH RECURSIVE and others
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-06-30 14:55:47
Subject: Re: VirtualXactLockTableInsert

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