Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL funding/organization

2001-09-22 Thread Bruce Momjian
> On Sat, 22 Sep 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > Three things that GB provided for their $25million: > > > > > > 1. Tom's ability to focus on programming more > > > 2. Bruce's ability to travel and evangelize(sp?) more > > > 3. www.greatbridge.org > > > > > > Three things that are going to cha

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL funding/organization

2001-09-22 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Sat, 22 Sep 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Three things that GB provided for their $25million: > > > > 1. Tom's ability to focus on programming more > > 2. Bruce's ability to travel and evangelize(sp?) more > > 3. www.greatbridge.org > > > > Three things that are going to change now that GB is

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL funding/organization

2001-09-21 Thread Bruce Momjian
> Three things that GB provided for their $25million: > > 1. Tom's ability to focus on programming more > 2. Bruce's ability to travel and evangelize(sp?) more > 3. www.greatbridge.org > > Three things that are going to change now that GB is gone: > > 1. tom's wife will see more of him > 2. bru

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL funding/organization

2001-09-21 Thread Karel Zak
On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 12:47:08PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > Three things that are going to change now that GB is gone: > > 1. tom's wife will see more of him > 2. bruce's wife and kids will see more of him It seems that GB finish is their women conspiracy :-) Karel

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL funding/organization

2001-09-20 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Thu, 20 Sep 2001, Lamar Owen wrote: > On Thursday 20 September 2001 08:58 am, mlw wrote: > > Now that GreatBridge is gone. (I'm pretty sad about that, they looked like > > they were working on some cool stuff.) > > > Has this changed, in any way, the development path of PostgreSQL? > > Just my

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL funding/organization

2001-09-20 Thread Lamar Owen
On Thursday 20 September 2001 12:47 pm, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Thu, 20 Sep 2001, Lamar Owen wrote: > > On Thursday 20 September 2001 08:58 am, mlw wrote: > > > Has this changed, in any way, the development path of PostgreSQL? > > Just my personal opinion: > > long before Great Bridge was on

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL funding/organization

2001-09-20 Thread Lamar Owen
On Thursday 20 September 2001 11:04 am, Thomas Lockhart wrote: > > ... but PostgreSQL cannot be orphaned in that > > sense due to its open source nature. > I'll second that. It isn't just "the open source nature" of PostgreSQL > which will keep it viable, it is the active developer and user commu

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL funding/organization

2001-09-20 Thread Thomas Lockhart
> ... but PostgreSQL cannot be orphaned in that > sense due to its open source nature. I'll second that. It isn't just "the open source nature" of PostgreSQL which will keep it viable, it is the active developer and user community which has grown up around it which makes it unlikely that it will

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL funding/organization

2001-09-20 Thread Lamar Owen
On Thursday 20 September 2001 08:58 am, mlw wrote: > Now that GreatBridge is gone. (I'm pretty sad about that, they looked like > they were working on some cool stuff.) > Has this changed, in any way, the development path of PostgreSQL? Just my personal opinion: While PostgreSQL was developed p

[HACKERS] PostgreSQL funding/organization

2001-09-20 Thread mlw
Now that GreatBridge is gone. (I'm pretty sad about that, they looked like they were working on some cool stuff.) Has this changed, in any way, the development path of PostgreSQL? ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, p