On Monday 30 January 2006 16:21, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jan 2006, Robert Treat wrote:
> > On Sunday 29 January 2006 22:23, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >> Mark Kirkwood said:
> >>> Mark Woodward wrote:
> >>>> There should e a big huge button and/or link
> >>>> to pgfountry that shows how much is availale to PostgreSQL.
> >>>
> >>> While there are links to 'em mentioned on the web site, I agree that
> >>> making (particularly) Pgfoundry more prominent would be a good idea.
> >>>
> >>> Mark, do you want to suggest that on -advocacy (since I suspect that's
> >>> the place to get it to happen)?
> >
> > I hate to repeat this sad story, but we're stalling due to the need for
> > server upgrades on the foundry to make it more robust. Eventually it
> > will get more play I imagine.
>
> 'k, I really hate to disappoint ppl, but there hasn't been a problem with
> pgfoundry in a fairly long time now ... we are working on migrating it to
> its own server, with most of the 'migration document' done, but we are
> bringing on new projects, with the EnterpriseDB folks just bringing online
> a few OSS tools, on a weekly basis ...
>
I understand why your defensive, but in this case it's misguided. The new
pgfoundry server isn't ready to go yet which is why it hasn't been moved to
yet and why gborg hasn't been transferred over yet. People are busy and
there are other issues, but the point still stands that we've yet to hear
anything from the foundry admin team that sounded like a proclamation to tear
the doors off of the thing.
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
