On Wed, 25 Aug 2004, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
For the first category, an inclusion could be possible if the software has a potential to reach more users and can make the offering more complete in some respect. If that's not the case, it should be included.
Most software that "sucks royally" will be filtered out in the first 4 steps. If it is not, and if a lot of people vote to get it in, well then it does not suck so bad after all, at least not according to the voters. So it's in provided nothing better exists already. It can still be replaced of course, should something better come along.
Sounds reasonable, and such policy could/would be fine tuned over time as well ...
Behind what? A list on pgFoundry of recommended software? Sure ... integrating that list into the physical postgresql.tar.gz file that is the core server distribution? No ...
The core server distribution is left untouched by all this.
Ah, then you've got me on side :)
It would be really nice if this project could publish packages using your BitTorrent and ftp mirrors though.
Actually, pgfoundry can be found on ftp://ftp.postgresql.org:/pub/projects/pgFoundry
I think BitTorrent might be a bit difficult though, since it isn't auto-updated ... or is it? David?
---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
