Re: inclusions WAS: Increased company involvement - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Joshua D. Drake
Subject Re: inclusions WAS: Increased company involvement
Date
Msg-id 4279049F.4060102@commandprompt.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: inclusions WAS: Increased company involvement  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: inclusions WAS: Increased company involvement  ("Gavin M. Roy" <gmr@ehpg.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
  > It's entirely likely that we haven't figured out how to make pgfoundry
> work yet.  But figure it out we must, or the project-as-a-whole will die
> of its own weight.  Not everything can be part of the core.

PgFoundry is coming along in its own right. I see three main problems 
with it at current:

1. It looks like a separate project from PostgreSQL (website, name, etc...)

2. Stability and speed (which is currently being resolved)

3. Gborg still exists (which is going away once number 2 is resolved).

The traffic on pgFoundry is increasing as are the projects being 
submitted. I don't think there is an issue of pgFoundry being a success 
as much as an issue of it being a success as part of the PostgreSQL 
project itself.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Marc G. Fournier"
Date:
Subject: Re: inclusions WAS: Increased company involvement
Next
From: "Gavin M. Roy"
Date:
Subject: Re: inclusions WAS: Increased company involvement