From: Sailesh Krishnamurthy <sailesh@cs.berkeley.edu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Rod Taylor <rbt@rbt.ca>
Cc: scott.marlowe <scott.marlowe@ihs.com>
Cc: Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Are we losing momentum?
Date: 24 Apr 2003 15:46:44 -0700
Message-ID: <bxyr87rldij.fsf@datafix.CS.Berkeley.EDU> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <25012.1051223307@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0304230922450.12251-100000@css120.ihs.com>
<bxyadeg1m3j.fsf@datafix.CS.Berkeley.EDU>
<1051189596.46146.24.camel@jester>
<bxyist3k0io.fsf@datafix.CS.Berkeley.EDU>
<25012.1051223307@sss.pgh.pa.us>
>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
Tom> Of course, IBM can afford to keep reps on the SQL standards
Tom> committee to make sure that no future spec extension
Tom> conflicts with the names they've used for their additions to
Tom> INFORMATION_SCHEMA. We, on the other hand, could easily get
Tom> burnt by spec changes.
Right it's pretty unfair. I'm not beating any drums here. It's more
than just making sure that no extensions conflict with what they've
used. It's also about makign their extensions the default.
One thing that they _do_ try though is to use very ibm-centric when
possible.
--
Pip-pip
Sailesh
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~sailesh
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: sailesh@cs.berkeley.edu, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, rbt@rbt.ca, scott.marlowe@ihs.com, shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in
Subject: Re: Are we losing momentum?
In-Reply-To: <bxyr87rldij.fsf@datafix.CS.Berkeley.EDU>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox