On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 12:59:36PM -0700, Joe Conway wrote:
> Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> >On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 03:05:36PM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> >
> >>Regardless, I think we should include a section of major new
> >>projects/developments from pgFoundry, because they ultimately make
> >>PostgreSQL a more useful database. Maybe this list should only be in the
> >
> >I like that. "New enhancement products" or something?
"enhancement products" makes me think if Encyte and the like... :P Maybe
"add-ons" would be better?
> In that case, what about things on gborg too? I just updated PL/R for
> 8.2 compatibility (and finally changed the status from alpha to beta).
>
> BTW, I'm happy to move PL/R over to pgFoundry, but became a little
> concerned about doing that after seeing the lengthy thread regarding
> pgFoundry concerns (but admittedly, I didn't have time to read the
> thread in detail, because I'm back over in Germany on a long business
> trip again).
I didn't mention gforge since it'd depricated, but I don't see an issue
with listing any add-on projects, no matter where they're hosted. For
example, didn't pgAdmin just add support for Slony? That's something
worth mentioning.
--
Jim Nasby jim@nasby.net
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
