On Tue, 2002-08-13 at 12:19, Gregory Seidman wrote:
> Vince Vielhaber sez:
> } On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> }
> } > Sourceforge (VA Software), in a deal with IBM, is moving away from
> } > PostgreSQL and Oracle and moving to use DB2 and IBM software for their
> } > site:
> } >
> } > http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2120770,00.html
> }
> } What's next? MSSQL?
>
> That's hardly fair. I'm a big fan of PostgreSQL, and I think it's great
> software produced and supported by great people.
> <snip>
> When the cost becomes equivalent, such as when IBM offers DB2 free for
> academic use or offers it in a deal to VA, DB2's disadvantages with respect
> to PostgreSQL disappear. If I could get IBM to hand me (i.e. my company) a
> commercial license to DB2 at no cost, I'd ditch PostgreSQL in an instant.
<snip>
I simply feel that DB2 is a superior
> product among existing DB systems, commercial or otherwise, and PostgreSQL
> doesn't come close.
>
> } Vince.
> --Greg
>
Without turning this into a my DB vs. your DB thread, it would make
little sense to port the entire code base of the size of sourceforge's
to a new database system unless you were experiencing trouble with the
current db back end, which afaik they did not have trouble with. What
was far more likely to be a motivating factor was the new partnership
offered to VA Software that will open up a revenue stream they
drastically need. Personally I think tying Sourcforge to websphere/db2
makes the product weaker but perhaps they can find a way to enhance it
on db2 that they couldn't with their current db set-up. Trying to set up
all of the requisite parts of the sourceforge system on your own is a
nightmare; that they couldn't package that solution and market it
successfully says something about the difficulty of trying to run a
software company based on open source projects.
Robert Treat