Re: Re: Red Hat to support PostgreSQL

On Wednesday 27 June 2001 17:17, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > However, I would be surprized if their shipped RHDB product didn't
> > incorporate changes that they came up with -- even if the PostgreSQL
> > group didn't apply them to the base dist.  Although I certainly reserve
> > the right to be wrong.  Yes, I know that may not be healthy.  Yet they do
> > it now with the Linux kernel (their 'enterprise' kernel patches, for
> > instance) -- why would PostgreSQL be any different?

> That would concern me if it ever happened.  GB hasn't done it and I hope
> RH doesn't either.

But they certainly are within license rights to do so.

However, knowing the 'Red Hat Way' as I do :-), the enhancements are almost
always packaged as patches, not as a modified tarball.  That is the RPM
packager's credo -- Pristine Source.  Patch all you want to -- just leave the
source tarball alone. The kernel RPMset that is installed has literally
hundreds of patches being applied -- to the pristine kernel.org tarball. I
see no indication that this would change at all.

Debian is doing the same with the PostgreSQL patches -- see the 'peer'
authentication discussion in HACKERS (that dropped out after I posted a link
to the patchset....).  Debian is, right now, distributing a fairly modified
PostgreSQL package -- 'peer' authentication, after all, is NOT standard fare.

This is one good side effect of their calling it 'Red Hat Database' -- their
users aren't as likely to run to postgresql.org for support :->.
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11