On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 10:38 PM, Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > That's kind of what I'm doing now. But I'm wondering if I should >> > bother with pgFoundry at all. It seems pretty dead (see Josh Berkus's >> > reply). > > Actually, pgFoundry remains extremely popular. Currently, we're getting an > average of 2-3 new projects a week. > > The issue with pgFoundry is that it's based on a hacked version of the > GForge code, which had legacy problems to begin with and is now no longer > upgradable. And while lots of people want to complain about it, nobody > wants to put in the 15-25 hours of work required to fix it up so that it > supports SVN and code snippets (including me).
Well that's not strictly true - I persuaded one of the GForge developers to work on the upgrade. As far as I'm aware, we're still waiting for the hardware/OS platform to be sorted out after some initial problems. I suspect JD will tell me something different though - that being the case, perhaps we can work out the issues and get on with the upgrade. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
