On Wed, 2003-11-19 at 11:31, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Nov 2003, Michael Meskes wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 04:19:35PM -0600, Austin Gonyou wrote:
> > > I've been looking all over but I can't seem to see a company that is
> > > providing *up-to-date* postgresql support and provides their own
> > > supported binaries. Am I barking up the wrong tree entirely here?
> >
> > Why do you insist on "their own binaries"? I think there are several
> > companies out there providing support for a given version of PostgreSQL
> > and doubt they all ask for their own binaries. At least we do not.
>
> We don't either, nor do we worry about specific platforms ...
I agree. We shouldn't have to really care, so long as there are
guidelines for which platforms/distributions/sources are supported.
Thus, the binaries provided == all of that combined. I think that the
aforementioned requirements is easier, and more intelligent to require
of a support organization, but our dev guys were complaining a bit and
sought this as a resolution to their complaints. I don't see it being
entirely feasible, but we'll see.
> ----
> Marc G. Fournier PostgreSQL, Inc (http://www.pgsql.com)
> Email: scrappy@pgsql.com Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
--
Austin Gonyou <austin@coremetrics.com>
Coremetrics, Inc.
