X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (wm.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE6839FC488 for ; Sun, 27 Aug 2006 04:40:43 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 70819-05 for ; Sun, 27 Aug 2006 07:40:41 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: delayed 17:40:34.058745 by SQLgrey- Received: from localhost.localdomain (host86-130-26-100.range86-130.btcentralplus.com [86.130.26.100]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB7AC9FC47D for ; Sun, 27 Aug 2006 04:40:40 -0300 (ADT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=localhost.localdomain) by localhost.localdomain with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1GHFFu-0006Kb-9m; Sun, 27 Aug 2006 08:40:30 +0100 To: Tom Lane Cc: Chahine Hamila , pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, "Jonah H. Harris" , "Jim C. Nasby" Subject: Re: integration of pgcluster into postgresql In-Reply-To: <17446.1156652573@sss.pgh.pa.us> (Tom Lane's message of "Sun, 27 Aug 2006 00:22:53 -0400") X-Draft-From: ("nnimap+webmail.enterprisedb.com:Inbox" 774) References: <20060826181804.11951.qmail@web57102.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <17446.1156652573@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Gregory Stark Organization: EnterpriseDB Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 08:40:30 +0100 Message-ID: <87irkemxsh.fsf@enterprisedb.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=4.127 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO, RCVD_IN_NJABL_DUL, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL X-Spam-Level: **** X-Archive-Number: 200608/1774 X-Sequence-Number: 89267 Tom Lane writes: >> That said, my company would feel more confortable with the idea that it's >> part of the postgresql mainstream distro for many obvious reasons - or we >> might drop postgresql altogether - which is why I'm proposing myself to do >> the necessary work to integrate it in postgresql if there's interest. > > The core development team has only a very finite number of cycles available. > Would you rather we spend our time on fixing pgcluster than on fixing the > core Postgres database? I'm beginning to wonder whether it would be better from a PR perspective to rename pgfoundry to something like modules.postgresql.org. While "modules" isn't necessarily technically right in postgresql vocabulary it's right in the more general sense And it doesn't imply the pieces of code are still in progress like "projects.postgresql.org" might and doesn't give the impression that they're living on their own without support from other postgres people like having a separate domain does. -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com