On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 12:26 -0700, Tom Lane wrote: > "Hooker, Jonathan" <[email protected]> writes: > >> Or, if enough people are annoyed about it, there might be a > >> Postgres-only fork. > > > I really hope that this is not RedHat's official stand on this. > > Sorry, I should have specified that I was just speaking for myself. > > > If this project forks, RedHat will lose a valuable upstream resource > > for implementing new features into their Satellite server product. > > Indeed. I don't *want* to see a fork, I'm just pointing out that that > might happen if nothing gets done.
At the rate things are going, I doubt it. Space walk developers are willing to accept postgres support patches, and those aren't forthcoming so I don't think a fork is likely. Its lack of developers thats the problem. Whats more likely is spacewalk depends on oracle forever and all that entails, allowing some users to use oracle in their environment and discouraging some users from ever using it. Or, redhat can decide enough users want postgres to switch to postgres only. Kevin > > regards, tom lane > > _______________________________________________ > Spacewalk-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel _______________________________________________ Spacewalk-devel mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
