mlw wrote:
> This is an interesting thought. My gut tells me it is a viable
> opportunity for the corporate entities that offer support and wish to
> have 'VAR' status.
>
> This is just my opinion, but I view the core development group as pure
> development, and the various people that resell or distribute PostgreSQL
> as a for-profit business as those responsible for maintaining backward
> support.
>
> Maybe RedHat or PostgreSQL Inc can do this? It is a really good message,
> "The best of open source, with on going support."
Very interesting thought. It could probably be done. Oh, hang on...
Red Hat is taking that angle for now. :-)
> And not to re-open a can of worms, but if PostgreSQL could upgrade
> without having to do a dump and restore, then this wouldn't really be an
> issue.
That's not really true. Have personally seen applications that places
use and rely on that are not yet compatible with v 7.3.x, because the
vendors of the applications compiled against something that was of
version 7.2.x, and doesn't work with version 7.3.x.
Now, that's not our fault, and not the fault of the places running the
applications, it's just part of how PostgreSQL is applied out in the
real world.
:-)
Regards and best wishes,
Justin Clift
--
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi
