Comparing with MySQL/FireBird is not to be taken other-wise. Good things need to be taken care of if they can benefit users. Yes, it is open source and one can contribute code. But the level of expertise and skill also matters. PGSQL development community involve experts in the areas of RDBMS, C/C++. Where as most of the users are not experts in C/C++. My personal areas include
VB.NET. I don't think VB is suitable for writing the code you people write.
And yes, original post started with pgAdmin. It has nothing to do with PGSQL. I am a newbie and with above posts it became clear to me that pgAdmin and PGSQL differs. I suggested features considering both as a common product.
They are suggested features not a force that you write code for it.
On 8/4/07, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net > wrote:
Neil Conway wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-04-08 at 09:26 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>> So what are *you* doing about it? This is open source, where if you want
>> it and it's not there you make it. Otherwise you're just one more
>> whinger wanting something for nothing.
>>
>
> I don't agree with this attitude at all: we should be listening to our
> users, not insulting them for their feedback. We can (and should) ignore
> certain suggested features, but the idea that asking for a feature is
> "whinging" if it doesn't include a patch is plainly wrong, IMHO.
>
>
>
Well, contributions come in many forms, not just patches. Note too that
almost all the requested features had nothing to do with core postgres,
which is what this list is about (IIRC the exception was support for
logical column ordering, which is already on the TODO list).
Perhaps if there had been less "MySQL/Firebird is great and you guys
suck" about the original post I would have reacted less strongly :-)
cheers
andrew
