Dave, Lamar and Katie can cheer now 'cuze this is the last comment
I'm going to make on this. All others will be ignored, probably.
The one thing I haven't seen from Dave, Lamar or Katie on this is
reputation. You're all for the PostgreSQL name going on it but I
have yet to see any of you so sure of yourselves that you'd put
your own name on it. The license allows it. Red Hat did it. I
see no "PageSQL" or "KatieSQL" or even an "Oh-Win SQL" being offered
up. Yet all three of you are advocating that the PostgreSQL stamp
of approval should be immediately placed on it (ok, Lamar may not
be as in favor as the Dave and Katie).
Without documented testing and sufficient warnings until enough
history is banked, I don't think a native windows port should be
given any kind of seal of approval. After that, what about keeping
the code current? In a year or so will it suffer from bit-rot and
be the source of complaints? Are there going to be security concerns
surrounding it? Is there going to be a bunch of scrambling going on
to put out a patch when the latest active-x bug hoses the data dir?
Vince.
-- Fast, inexpensive internet service 56k and beyond! http://www.pop4.net/ http://www.meanstreamradio.com
http://www.unknown-artists.com Internet radio: It's not file sharing, it's just radio.
