Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

2005-05-03 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Tue, 3 May 2005, Thomas Hallgren wrote: Marc G. Fournier wrote: On Tue, 3 May 2005, Tom Lane wrote: I think the idea is that plphp would be in our CVS, but would not be shipped as part of the main tarball, rather as its own separate tarball. That is what I'm hoping for ... if it can be shipped

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

2005-05-03 Thread Joshua D. Drake
I don't mind if its *also* ship'd in the main distribution as well, I just want that 'quick to download since I already have the libraries/headers installed' package ... Any other PL's not currently in your CVS that you might consider to bring in while you're at it? /me heres the sound of the p

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

2005-05-03 Thread Thomas Hallgren
Marc G. Fournier wrote: On Tue, 3 May 2005, Tom Lane wrote: I think the idea is that plphp would be in our CVS, but would not be shipped as part of the main tarball, rather as its own separate tarball. That is what I'm hoping for ... if it can be shipped as a seperate tarball, my arguments *again

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

2005-05-02 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Jim C. Nasby wrote: On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 04:53:59PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: See my cross-posting where I specifically state I have no plans for buildfarm to test things outside core. It's doable in principle, but would involve huge amounts of work, for which I at least (as buildfarm's

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

2005-05-02 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 04:53:59PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > See my cross-posting where I specifically state I have no plans for > buildfarm to test things outside core. It's doable in principle, but > would involve huge amounts of work, for which I at least (as buildfarm's > creator/admini

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

2005-05-02 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Ron Mayer wrote: * I'd like to see the status of pgFoundry projects on http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_status.pl Right now I have confidence in most of the contrib modules largely because I can quickly see if they succeed or fail. I'd like any pgFoundry project that is released

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

2005-05-02 Thread Ron Mayer
Marc G. Fournier wrote: That is what pgFoundry was setup for ... to give projects the visibiilty they would get through the core distribution by making sure they are referenced in a central place, but providing the maintainers with direct CVS access to make changes to their code in a timely mann

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

2005-05-02 Thread Christopher Browne
Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when [EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Jim C. Nasby") wrote: > Anyone interested in pooling funds for features should take a look at > http://people.freebsd.org/~phk/funding.html, which is about a FreeBSD > developer who offered to work full-time on developing some specific

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

2005-05-02 Thread Hannu Krosing
On N, 2005-04-28 at 20:13 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > Hannu, > > > But I too expected the discussion to take place on pgsql-hackers, not > > some half-hidden mailinglist on pgfoundry. Or at least an announcement > > of that mailinglist to be made on pgsql-hachers. > > Yeah, we should announce the

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

2005-04-28 Thread Bruce Momjian
Robert Treat wrote: > ISTM the allure of differentiation and branding is going to be too strong for > us to prevent such things. An easy way to differentiate is to add some > proprietary/unique extension to the main code and then package that up. If > you have to have all your extensions be put

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

2005-04-28 Thread Josh Berkus
Hannu, > But I too expected the discussion to take place on pgsql-hackers, not > some half-hidden mailinglist on pgfoundry. Or at least an announcement > of that mailinglist to be made on pgsql-hachers. Yeah, we should announce the mailing list. Actually, I did direct e-mail a bunch of people (

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

2005-04-28 Thread Andy Astor
> > However, there was a lot of coordination that happened with Fujitsu that > > I don't see happening with the current companies involved. Companies > > are already duplicating work that is also done by community members or > > by other companies. > > That is bound to happen no matter what. Look

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

2005-04-28 Thread Magnus Hagander
> > > However, there was a lot of coordination that happened > with Fujitsu > > > that I don't see happening with the current companies involved. > > > Companies are already duplicating work that is also done by > > > community members or by other companies. > > > > That is why we have 80 Linu

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

2005-04-28 Thread Robert Treat
On Thursday 28 April 2005 01:48, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > Do companies want to write for Blue Hat PostgreSQL and Suza PostgreSQL > > because that might be what happens if we don't stay organized? In fact, > > it might have be happening already. > > Well that depends... If the companies are writi

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

2005-04-28 Thread Bruce Momjian
Hannu Krosing wrote: > > Which is why (hate to beat a dead horse) many OSS projects have moved > > to 6 month release cycles. > > Well, it is a two-sided thing. On one hand, businesses usually need new > features "yesterday", but on the other hand, business would loose most > of the benefit of get

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

2005-04-28 Thread Hannu Krosing
On K, 2005-04-27 at 22:21 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > However, there was a lot of coordination that happened with Fujitsu that > > I don't see happening with the current companies involved. Companies > > are already duplicating work that is also done by community members or > > by other comp

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

2005-04-27 Thread Bruce Momjian
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > > > > Do companies want to write for Blue Hat PostgreSQL and Suza PostgreSQL > > because that might be what happens if we don't stay organized? In fact, > > it might have be happening already. > > Well that depends... If the companies are writing for Pervasive > Post

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

2005-04-27 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Do companies want to write for Blue Hat PostgreSQL and Suza PostgreSQL because that might be what happens if we don't stay organized? In fact, it might have be happening already. Well that depends... If the companies are writing for Pervasive PostgreSQL I don't think they would have a problem wi

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

2005-04-27 Thread Bruce Momjian
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > However, there was a lot of coordination that happened with Fujitsu that > > I don't see happening with the current companies involved. Companies > > are already duplicating work that is also done by community members or > > by other companies. > > That is bound to happ

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

2005-04-27 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
And finally, we have a few companies working on features that they eventually want merged back into the PostgreSQL codebase. That is a very tricky process and usually goes badly unless the company seeks community involvement from the start, including user interface, implementation, and coding stan

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

2005-04-27 Thread Joshua D. Drake
However, there was a lot of coordination that happened with Fujitsu that I don't see happening with the current companies involved. Companies are already duplicating work that is also done by community members or by other companies. That is bound to happen no matter what. Look at plJava and plJ. S