| From: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>, jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, Paragon Corporation <lr(at)pcorp(dot)us>, "'PostGIS Development Discussion'" <postgis-devel(at)postgis(dot)refractions(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: List of PostgreSQL Forks |
| Date: | 2009-10-02 03:18:10 |
| Message-ID: | 200910012318.10670.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
On Thursday 01 October 2009 06:10:26 Markus Wanner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > PostGIS is not a fork. Not sure where that idea comes from.
>
> Neither do I personally consider Postgres-R a fork. I still think of it
> as a (rather huge) patch, a bit like SE-PostgreSQL. However, it clearly
> depends on your definition of what a "fork" is.
>
> Maybe "based on Postgres" or similar would better describe the list (and
> allow even more projects to be named)?
>
We use the term "Postgres derived databases" on the wiki.
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_derived_databases
I'd note that we didn't think Postgres-R was beyond a big patch either, so it
isn't listed.
--
Robert Treat
Conjecture: http://www.xzilla.net
Consulting: http://www.omniti.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Treat | 2009-10-02 03:34:18 | Re: List of PostgreSQL Forks |
| Previous Message | Robert Treat | 2009-10-02 03:06:43 | Re: Please comment on trademark guidelines |