On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 01:07:56AM -0800, Christophe Pettus wrote:
>
>
> > On Jan 24, 2025, at 01:03, Vish Penmetsa <vish.penmetsa@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Probably I might have misunderstood the purpose of the group or the workings of the postgresql group.
> >
> > I thought the group will look at suggestions on a voluntary basis review them and if found useful will approve to
carryforward with the suggestions.
> >
> > In this case vmssowftare group provides the os copy on VM's but I thought the group leadership will do some
communications.
>
> The organization of the PostgreSQL Global Development Group is not like the organization of a commercial software
organization. It is up to the general developer community to propose, advocate, and see through any changes (including
ports). The "leadership" reviews and approves contributions to the primary core PostgreSQL code, but it is up to the
personor organization that wants a feature to do the work to make it actually happen.
>
> So, basically, if you want a maintained VMS port, you need to either drive the project yourself, or find others who
will.
This email thread from 2003 says VMS probably doesn't work anymore
because of lack of testers:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/200301071531.h07FVWI08147%40candle.pha.pa.us#0dbc1439f51ec7842125fb8ae200b6da
I think we worked on VAX/Unix-Posix for many years after that but
we eventually removed it.
Our normal development flow is:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Todo#Development_Process
Desirability -> Design -> Implement -> Test -> Review -> Commit
so I would focus on Desirability at this point. The next question is
whether the demand justifies the code changes.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.
