Comparing with MySQL/FireBird is not to be taken other-wise. Good things
need to be taken care of if they can benefit users. Yes, it is open source
and one can contribute code. But the level of expertise and skill also
matters. PGSQL development community involve experts in the areas of RDBMS,
C/C++. Where as most of the users are not experts in C/C++. My personal
areas include VB.NET. I don't think VB is suitable for writing the code you
And yes, original post started with pgAdmin. It has nothing to do with
PGSQL. I am a newbie and with above posts it became clear to me that pgAdmin
and PGSQL differs. I suggested features considering both as a common
They are suggested features not a force that you write code for it.
On 8/4/07, Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Neil Conway wrote:
> > On Sat, 2007-04-08 at 09:26 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >> So what are *you* doing about it? This is open source, where if you
> >> it and it's not there you make it. Otherwise you're just one more
> >> whinger wanting something for nothing.
> > I don't agree with this attitude at all: we should be listening to our
> > users, not insulting them for their feedback. We can (and should) ignore
> > certain suggested features, but the idea that asking for a feature is
> > "whinging" if it doesn't include a patch is plainly wrong, IMHO.
> Well, contributions come in many forms, not just patches. Note too that
> almost all the requested features had nothing to do with core postgres,
> which is what this list is about (IIRC the exception was support for
> logical column ordering, which is already on the TODO list).
> Perhaps if there had been less "MySQL/Firebird is great and you guys
> suck" about the original post I would have reacted less strongly :-)