Message-ID: <3F72C114.6010706@postgresql.org>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:19:00 +0800
From: Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
	rv:1.5) Gecko/20030924 Thunderbird/0.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
Cc: pgsql-www@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: 'Official' Interfaces
References: <03AF4E498C591348A42FC93DEA9661B83AF24A@mail.vale-housing.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <03AF4E498C591348A42FC93DEA9661B83AF24A@mail.vale-housing.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dave Page wrote:

> Hi Guys,
> 
> It's been brought to my attention that there is no mechanism in place to
> allow people to recognise the best or 'official' PostgreSQL interfaces,
> and I don't just mean those in the core distribution, but those that we
> consider the best of their type such a psqlODBC, libpqxx, Npgsql and so
> on.
> 
> Obviously we can list them on a webpage, but what criteria could we use
> to select them?

We should probably start with the commonly used interfaces and have a 
note on the page asking people to advise us of the others.  Then we 
should email the link to the pgsql-general mailing list and people there 
will suggest most of the things we've otherwise missed.

Hope that helps.

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift


> Any thoughts/comments/ideas?
> 
> Regards, Dave.
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster