Dave Page wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Joshua D. Drake<jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 19:50 +0100, Dave Page wrote:
>>> I would say no to forks, but yes to alternate distros.
>> Where does Mammoth fall as it is Open Source?
>
> Is it a fork, or an add-on like Slony? If the latter, I'd say yes, it
> should be included as it's clearly centered around 'pure' PostgreSQL.
> If the former, then, well, no.
>
> I'm just one opinion though - others (including you) may disagree.
How about a separate section for forks whether Open Source (HadoopDB)
or not (EnterpriseDB) as well as whether closely related
ones (Postgres Plus) or distantly related ones (Netezza).
I think one of the neatest strengths of selling the use of
Postgres (over, say, MySQL or microsoft's) is the wide range
of forks that a company can grow into if they feel any
particular need down the road.
I wonder if our community website embraced the proprietary
forks more, people new to the project (say, CFOs) would be
quicker to see that this is mature high-end serious technology.
