On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 2 Dec 2000, Don Baccus wrote:
> >
> > > > I *am* one of those volunteers
> > >
> > > Yes, I well remember you screwing up PG 7.0 just before beta, without bothering
> > > to test your code, and leaving on vacation.
> > >
> > > You were irresponsible then, and you're being irresponsible now.
> >
> > Okay, so let me get this one straight ... it was irresponsible for him to
> > put code in that was broken the last time, but it wouldn't be
> > irresponsible for us to release code that we don't feel is ready this
> > time? *raised eyebrow*
> >
> > Just want to get this straight, as it kinda sounds hypocritical to me, but
> > want to make sure that I understand before I fully arrive at that
> > conclusion ... :)
>
> IIRC, this thread woke up on someone complaining about PostgreSQl inc
> promising
> to release some code for replication in mid-october and asking for
> confirmation
> that this is just a schedule slip and that the project is still going on
> and
> going to be released as open source.
>
> What seems to be the answer is: "NO, we will keep the replication code
> proprietary".
>
> I have not seen this answer myself, but i've got this impression from
> the contents
> of the whole discussion.
>
> Do you know if this is the case ?
If this is the impression that someone gave, I am shocked ... Thomas
himself has already posted stating that it was a scheduale slip on his
part. Vadim did up the software days before the Oracle OpenWorld
conference, but it was a very rudimentary implementation. At the show,
Thomas dove in to build a basic interface to it, and, as time permits, has
been working on packaging to get it into contrib before v7.1 is released
...
I've been trying to follow this thread, and seem to have missed where
someone arrived at the conclusion that we were proprietarizing(word?) this
... we do apologize that it didn't get out mid-October, but it is/was
purely a scheduale slip ...