On Tue, 17 Nov 1998, Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 16, 1998 at 03:42:45PM -0400, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> > From what Taral has investigatd and come up with, if we stick with
> > a 2.2 implementation of Corba (mico is only free implementation, that I am
> > aware of, tha tis fully 2.2 compliant...the rest are all 2.0 still), then
> > when the other ORBs, when they come up to speed (if?), making it workk
> > with them should be relatively easy.
>
> I agree that we should go with 2.2.
>
> > The end result I'd like to see if for PostgreSQL to be able to be
> > compiled against whatever implementation the installer wishes, as long as
> > they are 2.2 compliant...
>
> Yes.
>
> > Quite frankly, I want the *core* to be built around a complete
> > implementation...if someone is really hot on ORBit, and wants to add in
> > compatibility code so that it will work with ORBit, so bit it...but I want
> > the *core* to be 2.2 clean/compliant...and mico is the only ORB out there
> > at this point in time that will allow that...
>
> I still think eventually PostgreSQL win run on ORBit on most systems. :-)
>
Possibly...which makes a few assumption though...1st is that ORBit
ever catches up to mico and 2 that mico doesn't speed up as it matures :)
Personally, the only thing that I care about is that *we* aren't
the ones that are scrambling to catch up to the 2.2 standard...we have a
clean (albeit slow) solution to work with now, let the other
implementations catch up to that...
Marc G. Fournier
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy@hub.org secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org