From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Reply-To: josh@agliodbs.com
Organization: Aglio Database Solutions
To: Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Collaboration Tool Proposal -- Summary to date
Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 13:49:06 -0800
User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, pgsql-www@postgresql.org
References: <200402260912.54001.josh@agliodbs.com>
	<200402291211.33958.josh@agliodbs.com> <404258E9.10800@samurai.com>
In-Reply-To: <404258E9.10800@samurai.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200402291349.07241.josh@agliodbs.com>

Neil,

> Frankly, I think the PostgreSQL project would be sending "the wrong 
> message" if we chose our tools on any basis other than functionality. 
> We ought to use what works, whether it supports PG or not. Whether the 
> bug tracker tool uses PostgreSQL, flat files or MS Access to store 
> data is entirely secondary to whether it serves the needs of the 
> development group.

OK, then, more substantial:   I personally lack confidence in any tool that 
uses an in-memory object database to store persistent data.   I also feel 
pessimistic about our ability to extend and integrate a tool which uses 
radically different storage mechanism than the other tools we're using.  
Finally, for any of these things I forsee asking the communites involved with 
those projects for help, and it seems foolish to beg for help (as would 
probably be required of a project that does nor support PG) when there are 
people offering to help us.

THIS JUST IN:  as if we didn't have enough options, Talli of the OpenACS 
community has offered their help with using OpenACS modules for any of the 
web tasks we've discussed.   More later.

-- 
-Josh Berkus
 Aglio Database Solutions
 San Francisco