X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx2.hub.org [200.46.204.254]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 536CF11F60A0 for ; Sat, 15 Apr 2006 23:44:36 -0300 (ADT) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Score: -1.351 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.351 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.248, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx2.hub.org [200.46.204.254]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RXajtvFsphMy for ; Sat, 15 Apr 2006 23:44:35 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from eastrmmtao06.cox.net (eastrmmtao06.cox.net [68.230.240.33]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46D8911F60A4 for ; Sat, 15 Apr 2006 23:44:32 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [192.168.0.8] (really [24.136.35.185]) by eastrmmtao06.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.01 201-2131-130-101-20060113) with ESMTP id <20060416024433.UAGL18886.eastrmmtao06.cox.net@[192.168.0.8]>; Sat, 15 Apr 2006 22:44:33 -0400 From: Robert Treat To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Google SoC--Idea Request Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 22:44:22 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.3 Cc: "Jonah H. Harris" , "Neil Conway" , "Dave Page" References: <001401c660ca$a9852b27$6a01a8c0@valehousing.co.uk> <1145142174.9085.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> <36e682920604151625uaefda49uceb960cf9e14a62f@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <36e682920604151625uaefda49uceb960cf9e14a62f@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200604152244.23349.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> X-Archive-Number: 200604/590 X-Sequence-Number: 82313 On Saturday 15 April 2006 19:25, Jonah H. Harris wrote: > On 4/15/06, Neil Conway wrote: > > Doing the latter is a precondition for implementing the former in a > > reasonable way, I believe. > > > > > > BTW, these two web log entries summarizing Mono and Mozilla's > > experiences with SoC might make interesting reading: > > Thanks for the reading material. I don't think our project is exactly > the same, but it's good information to keep in mind. > Agreed. I sent some ideas to Josh, was thinking he might be posting a list soon. I kept it aimed at a few ideas I have had/seen that need an initial push to get going but beyond that could be (and likely would be) community maintained. Example? Extendning the build farm code to test external pl langs or database drivers or patches other modules. We've talked about it, and if someone had the time to make the push, I believe this would be community maintained going forward. > > Given the above, I would be wary of such projects bit-rotting. If the > > upstream project hasn't bothered to add PostgreSQL support, there might > > be a good reason why: writing truly database-agnostic applications is > > not always easy (or even desirable). > > This isn't always the case. In a lot of cases, the developers just > wanted to take the easy route and used MySQL... they have a lot of > people asking for PostgreSQL support but they don't have the expertise > to add it themselves. > I think more importantly is that the time needed to do an initial port is often much greater than it is to maintain a port. -- Robert Treat Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL