public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Lukas Kahwe Smith <[email protected]>
To: Robert Treat <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL rebranding
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 13:59:51 +0200
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>

Robert Treat schrieb:
> On Tuesday 29 August 2006 03:46, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am collecting a list of PostgreSQL rebrands.
>>
>> So far I have the following:
>>
>> Illustra, EnterpriseDB, Bizgres, BizgresMPP, Mammoth, Red Hat Database,
>> Netezza, parACCEL
>>
> 
> Are you looking for PostgreSQL rebrands or POSTGRES (a la Berkely) re-brands?  
> AIUI Illustra is the latter but not the former.  

I was not going to make such a distinction.

>> I will also try to find out during what time these were offered, the
>> company that was behind this offering, the license (BSD, proprietary
>> etc.) and to what extend the changes made it back into the PostgreSQL
>> tree (none, partially, full).
>>
>> So throw me whatever names you remember and I will try to research them.
>> Of course I would not mind if you can provide links to get the above
>> information as well.
>>
> 
> Powergres is/was offered by SRA as a commercial, threaded windows version of 
> PostgreSQL.  Also NuSphere/Peerdirect released a windows version of 
> PostgreSQL that iirc was called UltraSQL.  There was also "Pervasive 
> Postgres" which was recently offered by Pervasive.  I don't recall if Great 
> Bridge had such a repackaging, but someone else could probably chime in on 
> that. HTH. 

I was not sure where I should sensibly draw the line, as there will 
likely be little differences in every distribution (since they tend to 
make their own choices about what to backport etc). So I settled on 
"rebrandings". But thats not a clear distinction either.

I guess what I really am looking to list is all the intentional "forks" 
that added functionality or that removed the "PostgreSQL" label to at 
least on the surface make it non obvious that it is based on PostgreSQL.

So the question is if "Pervasive Postgres" was really a modified 
version. Since it kept "Postgres" in the name I would not count it among 
the "rebrands".

However I guess the question is if there is a general interest to 
maintain such a list from the PostgreSQL project and in that case we 
maybe should discuss what everybody thinks should end up on there.

Maybe a newly created wiki would be a place to build up this list?

regards,
Lukas

view thread (34+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

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: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: PostgreSQL rebranding
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox