Re: beta testing version - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | Ross J. Reedstrom |
---|---|
Subject | Re: beta testing version |
Date | |
Msg-id | 20001202155115.A5030@rice.edu Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: beta testing version (Don Baccus <dhogaza@pacifier.com>) |
Responses |
Re: beta testing version
Re: beta testing version |
List | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Dec 02, 2000 at 11:31:37AM -0800, Don Baccus wrote: > At 05:42 PM 12/2/00 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >Don Baccus writes: > > > >> Exactly what is PostgreSQL, Inc doing in this area? > > > >Good question... See http://www.erserver.com/. > <snip> > > Boy, I can just imagine the uproar this statement will cause on Slashdot when > the world finds out about it. > That one doesn't worry me us much as this quote from the press release at http://www.pgsql.com/press/PR_5.html "We expect to have the source code tested and ready to contribute to the open source community before the middle of October. Until that time we are considering requests from a number of development companies and venture capital groups to join us in this process." Where's the damn core code? I've seen a number of examples already of people asking about remote access/replication function, with an eye toward implementing it, and being told "PostgreSQL, Inc. is working on that". It's almost Microsoftesque: preannounce future functionality suppressing the competition. I realize this is probably just the typical deadline slip that we see on the public releases of pgsql itself, not a silent retraction of the promise to release the code (especially since some of the same core people are involved), but there is a difference: if I absolutely need something that's only in CVS right now, I can bite the bullet and use a snapshot server. With erserver, I'm stuck sitting on my hands, with a promise of future functionality. Well, not really sitting on my hands: working on other tasks, with the assumption that erserver will be there soon. I'd rather not roll my own in an incompatable way, and have to port or redo the custom parts. So, now I'm going into a couple critical, funding decision making meetings in the next few weeks. I was planning on being able to promise certain systems with concrete knowledge of what I will and won't be able to provide, and how much custom coding will be needed. Now, If the schedsule slips much more, I won't. It's even possible that the erserver's implementation won't fit my needs at all, and I'll be back rolling my own. I realize this sounds a bit ungrateful: they're giving away the code, after all, and potentially saving my a lot of work. It's just the contrast between the really open work on the core server, and the lack of a peep when the promised deadlines have rolled past that gets under my skin. I'd be really happy with someone reiterating the commitment to an open release, and letting us all know how badly the schedule has slipped. Remember, we're all here to help! Get everyone stomping bugs in code you're going to release soon anyway, and concentrate on the quasi-propriatary extensions. Ross
pgsql-hackers by date: