There are several good reasons to support more than one DB but if nobody wants or has an intrest to QA them, we can't garantee reliable releases. Most or all hevy-weight (means those who also contrib) Matterhorn adopters use MySQL and we don't have enough QA-capacity. So I would give postgresql only a chance if there is a commiter/institution that adopt the script and ensure the QA and some bugfixing - not all, we're a community. Diciding on list to support more without locating additional ressources for QA won't get this done.
Adopters - go for QA, it's easy, it's fun and the community needs YOU! Nils >> Oracle does not have a great track record in this area. Think Java >> and OpenOffice. > > The just changed the reference implementation for Java to one that is > fully open source and contains no proprietary code (openjdk). Isn't > that....ideal (at least in the long run)? > > I'm not a huge Oracle backer, but my goal is to make sure our testing > platform is reliable and sustainable. Two databases is one to many. > MySQL is open source, and used heavily in the enterprise. I think > Postgres is the same. I'm fine with just a show of hands (and > commitment for maintenance) from folks to choose the DB we stick with. > My main interest is in just dropping one of these. > > Chris > _______________________________________________ > Matterhorn mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn > > > To unsubscribe please email > [email protected] > _______________________________________________ > _______________________________________________ Matterhorn mailing list [email protected] http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn To unsubscribe please email [email protected] _______________________________________________
