Re: Mentioning Slony in docs

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Mentioning Slony in docs
Date: 2007-11-08 09:26:01
Message-ID: 1194513961.4251.193.camel@ebony.site
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-docs

On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 10:10 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 8. November 2007 schrieb Simon Riggs:
> > The main reason is that Slony is Copyrighted PGDG, so we own the code
> > and it is of course BSD licenced.
>
> Why is that a reason for mentioning it more prominently?

It's not, I'm assuming you'd actually like to see it more prominent.

My understanding was that we were trying to show equal favour to all of
the various solutions. This was a reason not to do that.

--
Simon Riggs
2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2007-11-08 15:22:48 Re: Mentioning Slony in docs
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2007-11-08 09:10:14 Re: Mentioning Slony in docs

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2007-11-08 15:22:48 Re: Mentioning Slony in docs
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2007-11-08 09:10:14 Re: Mentioning Slony in docs