On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Ron Mayer<rm_pg@cheapcomplexdevices.com> wrote:
> How about a separate section for forks whether Open Source (HadoopDB)
> or not (EnterpriseDB) as well as whether closely related
> ones (Postgres Plus) or distantly related ones (Netezza).
>
> I think one of the neatest strengths of selling the use of
> Postgres (over, say, MySQL or microsoft's) is the wide range
> of forks that a company can grow into if they feel any
> particular need down the road.
>
> I wonder if our community website embraced the proprietary
> forks more, people new to the project (say, CFOs) would be
> quicker to see that this is mature high-end serious technology.
I'm all for showing with diversity and breadth of the PostgreSQL
community and technology, but showcasing all of these things without
making it hard for people to find things will clutter the site and
make it had for people to find things as Chander suggested. I think
until we come up with a better way of presenting this information, we
need to find a middle ground.
--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com