Re: pgAdmin2 to be included in Dev-C++ - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

Hi all

Do u know that there are huge ammount of PRODUCTION(!!!) Windows NT
servers runnini apache , php and mysql? Just because the administrators
are lame, or because some companies cant afford more than one server,
and before they decided to use Windows NT (because they did not knew
about UNIX/Linux/FreeBSD). This is the reality.

One more thing - development for PgSQL is quite dificult just because it
does not runs on Windows 9X. There are huge ammount of development
servers running Win 9X, IIS, PHP and MySQL.

A Windows port for postgres will be great. There were before a postgres
installation for wndows but it does not worked properly.

Is not important HOW stable will Windows version work. For example MySQL
for Win is quite UNSTABLE too. The more important is to be VERY EASY to
be installed, that’s all.

Nikolay.


-----------------------------------------------------------
The Reboots are for hardware upgrades,
Found more here: http://www.nmmm.nu
Nikolay Mihaylov nmmm@nmmm.nu

-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Jean-Michel
POURE
Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 3:37 PM
To: mlw
Cc: Robert; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pgAdmin2 to be included in Dev-C++


Le Vendredi 10 Mai 2002 14:06, mlw a écrit :
> Sorry, I'm not interested in a cygwin version of PostgreSQL. I think
> it will do more harm than good. If we make it something that people
> want to try, and then they TRY it, they will find that is sucks, then
> we lose. It is very hard to remove the bad taste in ones mouth of a
> poor product. Think Yugo.

Cygwin is very stable. Its community is relatively small but very
actuve. We
could well provide a unique installer to "hide" Cygwin from the user.
This
can be done compiling Cygwin.dll in a separate user space, as per
discussion
with Dave Page.

> I have no patience with designed to fail projects, certainly not with
> my time. PostgreSQL+cygwin is a loser. If I am going to invest my time

> and effort, I want it to be great.

I agree a native Windows PostgreSQL would be better.

> OK, a conscientious developer will explore options. They will install
> various systems and try them. Given a cygwin+PostgreSQL system, MSSQL,

> MySQL, Oracle, DB2, etc. MSSQL will win. MSSQL will win over Oracle
> for cost and ease of setup. DB2 will lose, similarly to Oracle. MySQL
> will lose because it sucks. PostgreSQL+cygwin will lose because it
> will also suck.

MySQL under Windows is based on Cygwin.
MySQL sucks  and has a 'huge" success.

So let's do it in three moves :

- first move : gain a large audience providing a stable release of
Cygwin +
PostgreSQL. This could be done within days ... not weeks. This will be
much
better than MySQL.

- second move : release a bundle of pgAdmin2 + PostgreSQL on
http://www.postgresql.org, Bloodshed and other sites.

- third move : based on 1.000.000 downloads and 100.000 users, feed the
community with more developpers, more ideas and more Windows native
source-code. So you wron't say "I am alone".

"Rome ne s'est pas faite en une nuit".
Cheers,
Jean-michel

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster