> taken seriously by professionals in industry. For minor features, yes,
> perhaps it could be argued that the core team could ignore certain
> issues, and just wait for a patch. For something like Vista
> compatibility, if you want to be taken seriously by anyone who uses
> Windows (hands up anyone who knows a Windows user), "scratch your own
> itch" is not really going to cut it,
Then they can purchase MSSQL. No sweat off my back.
> IMHO. I'm used to getting that line
> when talking to 2 developer obscure projects that have a userbase of a
> half a dozen, but for a project like PostgreSQL, the "they tell you to
> do it yourself" brush is one we do NOT want to get tarred with.
>
> If we don't have the resources to cope with a Vista port immediately
> then so be it. If it's low priority, so be it. However, lets not appear
> to deride as unnecessary that which we cannot immediately provide a
> solution to. That's small time project mentality.
Asking someone to submit a patch is completely acceptable in this project.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
