Mark Woodward wrote:
I don't understand what you mean by PostgreSQL trying to be neutral.
Postgres focuses on what it's good at, being a database. It's not
really for or against anything. The PostgreSQL team is not interested
in maintaining code that so clearly falls outside of the scope.
Tha
> On Mon, 30 Jan 2006, Mark Woodward wrote:
>
>> It gets so frustrating sometimes, it isn't so black and white, there are
>> many levels of gray. The PostgreSQL project is trying so hard to be
>> neutral, that it is making itself irrelevant.
>
> We are making ourselves irrelevant because we encoura
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 04:35:15PM -0500, Mark Woodward wrote:
>> It gets so frustrating sometimes, it isn't so black and white, there are
>> many levels of gray. The PostgreSQL project is trying so hard to be
>> neutral, that it is making itself irrelevant.
>>
>> Designing and including features
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
I'm one of the 'foundry admin team', and I can definitely state that we
have been accepting projects as ppl are proposing them ... as to
gborg->pgfoundry, the only thing that has been holding that up is that
the two systems are not compatible at the DB end of things, so
On Mon, 30 Jan 2006, Robert Treat wrote:
On Monday 30 January 2006 16:21, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jan 2006, Robert Treat wrote:
On Sunday 29 January 2006 22:23, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Mark Kirkwood said:
Mark Woodward wrote:
There should e a big huge button and/or link
to pgfountr
On Monday 30 January 2006 16:21, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jan 2006, Robert Treat wrote:
> > On Sunday 29 January 2006 22:23, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >> Mark Kirkwood said:
> >>> Mark Woodward wrote:
> There should e a big huge button and/or link
> to pgfountry that shows how m
Secondly, if there is a "large group of users" who want this, why
doesn't someone do it? Any one of them could take the source, and
produce a bundle (say a PostgresPHP Plus Pack) that has all the
features you think should be in there. If they can demonstrate they can
maintain it, perhaps the pos
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 04:35:15PM -0500, Mark Woodward wrote:
> It gets so frustrating sometimes, it isn't so black and white, there are
> many levels of gray. The PostgreSQL project is trying so hard to be
> neutral, that it is making itself irrelevant.
>
> Designing and including features that
On Mon, 30 Jan 2006, Robert Treat wrote:
On Sunday 29 January 2006 22:23, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Mark Kirkwood said:
Mark Woodward wrote:
There should e a big huge button and/or link
to pgfountry that shows how much is availale to PostgreSQL.
While there are links to 'em mentioned on the web
On Mon, 30 Jan 2006, Mark Woodward wrote:
It gets so frustrating sometimes, it isn't so black and white, there are
many levels of gray. The PostgreSQL project is trying so hard to be
neutral, that it is making itself irrelevant.
We are making ourselves irrelevant because we encourage the use
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2006 at 03:15:06PM -0500, Mark Woodward wrote:
>> > Postgres generally seems to favor extensibility over integration, and
>> I
>> > generally agree with that approach.
>>
>> I generally agree as well, but.
>>
>> I think there is always a balance between "out of the box" vs
>>
On Sun, Jan 29, 2006 at 03:15:06PM -0500, Mark Woodward wrote:
> > Postgres generally seems to favor extensibility over integration, and I
> > generally agree with that approach.
>
> I generally agree as well, but.
>
> I think there is always a balance between "out of the box" vs
> "extensibi
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 10:25:39AM +0100, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
> Robert Treat wrote:
> >On Sunday 29 January 2006 22:23, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >>Mark Kirkwood said:
> >> ...
> >>A nicer idea would be something like a utility could we ship that will
> >>download, build and install module foo for
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 10:01:58PM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
>
>
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >
> >
> >Michael Fuhr wrote:
> >
> >>On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 12:20:25PM +0900, Michael Glaesemann wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>On Jan 30, 2006, at 12:23 , Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >>>
> A nicer i
On 30 Jan 2006 11:35:13 -0500
Robert Treat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>> CPAN modules, Ruby gems, PgFoundry ingots? :)
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> Tusks? (Extensions of the elephant.)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > Trunks?
> >
> > Dung?
> >
>
> gives a whole new meaning to the term "pa
On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 09:01, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
>
>
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >
> >
> > Michael Fuhr wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 12:20:25PM +0900, Michael Glaesemann wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Jan 30, 2006, at 12:23 , Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >>>
> A nicer idea
On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 08:25, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> Josh Berkus wrote:
>
> >Andrew,
> >
> >
> >
> >>A nicer idea would be something like a utility could we ship that
> >>will
> >>download, build and install module foo for you. Then we could publish
> >>many
> >>many modules on pgfoundry,
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Michael Fuhr wrote:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 12:20:25PM +0900, Michael Glaesemann wrote:
On Jan 30, 2006, at 12:23 , Andrew Dunstan wrote:
A nicer idea would be something like a utility could we ship that will
download, build and install module foo for you.
Michael Fuhr wrote:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 12:20:25PM +0900, Michael Glaesemann wrote:
On Jan 30, 2006, at 12:23 , Andrew Dunstan wrote:
A nicer idea would be something like a utility could we ship that will
download, build and install module foo for you.
CPAN modules, Ruby
Josh Berkus wrote:
Andrew,
A nicer idea would be something like a utility could we ship that
will
download, build and install module foo for you. Then we could publish
many
many modules on pgfoundry, their authors could look after them, and
installing them would be trivial. pgxs should ma
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 10:25:39AM +0100, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
> >Actually I don't think it would be all that hard. You just need to have
> >each project produce an xml file with bits of package information (name,
> >dependencies, version info, etc...) which could then be combined with all
> >
Robert Treat wrote:
On Sunday 29 January 2006 22:23, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Mark Kirkwood said:
>> ...
A nicer idea would be something like a utility could we ship that will
download, build and install module foo for you. Then we could publish many
many modules on pgfoundry, their authors could
Andrew,
> A nicer idea would be something like a utility could we ship that
> will
> download, build and install module foo for you. Then we could publish
> many
> many modules on pgfoundry, their authors could look after them, and
> installing them would be trivial. pgxs should make such a thing
On Sunday 29 January 2006 22:23, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Mark Kirkwood said:
> > Mark Woodward wrote:
> >> There should e a big huge button and/or link
> >> to pgfountry that shows how much is availale to PostgreSQL.
> >
> > While there are links to 'em mentioned on the web site, I agree that
> > m
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 12:20:25PM +0900, Michael Glaesemann wrote:
> On Jan 30, 2006, at 12:23 , Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >A nicer idea would be something like a utility could we ship that will
> >download, build and install module foo for you.
>
> CPAN modules, Ruby gems, PgFoundry ingots? :)
Tu
On Jan 30, 2006, at 12:23 , Andrew Dunstan wrote:
A nicer idea would be something like a utility could we ship that will
download, build and install module foo for you.
CPAN modules, Ruby gems, PgFoundry ingots? :)
Michael Glaesemann
grzm myrealbox com
---(end of
Mark Kirkwood said:
> Mark Woodward wrote:
>
>> There should e a big huge button and/or link
>> to pgfountry that shows how much is availale to PostgreSQL.
>>
>
> While there are links to 'em mentioned on the web site, I agree that
> making (particularly) Pgfoundry more prominent would be a good id
Mark Woodward wrote:
There should e a big huge button and/or link
to pgfountry that shows how much is availale to PostgreSQL.
While there are links to 'em mentioned on the web site, I agree that
making (particularly) Pgfoundry more prominent would be a good idea.
Mark, do you want to sugge
> David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I also think this would make a great pgfoundry project :)
>
> Yeah ... unless there's some reason that it needs to be tied to PG
> server releases, it's better to put it on pgfoundry where you can
> have your own release cycle.
>
I don't need pfoundry,
On 1/29/06, Mark Woodward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I generally agree as well, but.I think there is always a balance between "out of the box" vs"extensibility." I think integration and extensibility is fantastic foraddaptation of your product, but "oobe" (out of box experience) is
important fo
>
>
> Mark Woodward wrote:
>
>>XML is not really much more than a language, it says virtually nothing
>>about content. Content requires custom parsers.
>>
>>
>
> Really? Strange I've been dealing with it all this time without having
> to contruct a parser. What you do need is to provide event handl
Mark Woodward wrote:
XML is not really much more than a language, it says virtually nothing
about content. Content requires custom parsers.
Really? Strange I've been dealing with it all this time without having
to contruct a parser. What you do need is to provide event handlers to a
str
David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I also think this would make a great pgfoundry project :)
Yeah ... unless there's some reason that it needs to be tied to PG
server releases, it's better to put it on pgfoundry where you can
have your own release cycle.
regards, t
On Sun, Jan 29, 2006 at 02:04:47PM -0500, Mark Woodward wrote:
> > [removing -patches since no patch was attached] This sounds highly
> > specialised, and probably more appropriate for a pgfoundry
> > project.
>
> XML is not really much more than a language, it says virtually
> nothing about conte
>
> [removing -patches since no patch was attached]
> This sounds highly specialised, and probably more appropriate for a
> pgfoundry project.
>
> In any case, surely the whole point about XML is that you shouldn't need
> to contruct custom parsers. Should we include a specialised parser for
> evey
[removing -patches since no patch was attached]
Mark Woodward wrote:
I have a fairly simple extension I want to add to contrib. It is an XML
parser that is designed to work with a specific dialect.
I have a PHP extension called xmldbx, it allows the PHP system to
serialize its web session dat
36 matches
Mail list logo
