Re: Contents of greatbridge.com?

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Brent R(dot) Matzelle" <bmatzelle(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Contents of greatbridge.com?
Date: 2001-10-12 17:41:51
Message-ID: 200110121741.f9CHfqP09500@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> --- Tommy <tmartin1(at)telocity(dot)com> wrote:
> > From what I understand they went out of business. I have not
> > seen the site
> > morrored anywhere.
> >
> > I wonder what this means for the future of PostgreSQL?
>
> I would imagine that it would slow down the development a bit
> until things settle down. However, I saw that Tom and Bruce
> have been making changes to the CVS in preparation for release
> 7.2 so I would not be concerned. Also, keep in mind that Red
> Hat has a large stake in PostgreSQL now so I would imagine that
> they will contribute more now than they did in the past. No one
> has mentioned it so far, but I wonder if any of the Great Bridge
> people were hired by Red Hat? They were interested in buying
> Great Bridge in the past. It would seem logical that they would
> try.

Uhh, Tom and I are still on severance so we have some time to kill. :-)
We also don't feel we have to spend too much time looking for new
employment, if you know what I mean.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message curtis 2001-10-12 17:50:26 triggers, rules, visibility, and synchronization woes
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-10-12 17:41:03 Re: Understanding explain costs