Re: Mentioning Slony in docs

On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 10:10 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 8. November 2007 schrieb Simon Riggs:
> > The main reason is that Slony is Copyrighted PGDG, so we own the code
> > and it is of course BSD licenced.
>
> Why is that a reason for mentioning it more prominently?

It's not, I'm assuming you'd actually like to see it more prominent.

My understanding was that we were trying to show equal favour to all of
the various solutions. This was a reason not to do that.

--
  Simon Riggs
  2ndQuadrant  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com