dpage@postgresql.org (Dave Page) writes:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>>
>>
>> --On Monday, September 03, 2007 13:20:39 -0500 Decibel! <decibel@decibel.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, well, at the least then we really need to focus discussion on
>>> "Should we change the name" and quit worrying about how we'll actually
>>> do it.
>>
>> The other option is that EDB creates a Postgres community, GPLs the code and
>> puts it all into Subversion, and run it in parallel to the PostgreSQL community
>> ... then everyone that wants to keep the status quo can stick around and
>> continue marketing and pushing PostgreSQL, and those that "want change" can
>> just move over to that new project ...
>>
>> Now, *that* would be an interesting experiment ...
>
> Won't happen - we use CVS, not Subversion.
>
> ;-)
There's the part that *isn't* insane.
I believe CMD already has a Subversion repository tracking CVS, so
it's possible, albeit duplicative.
There's plenty of interest in figuring out the relative merits of
other SCMs, so the idea of having an alternate repository does have
merit.
I think there would be more value in having a *different* repository,
say using Git, Mercurial, Darcs, or such, so that there would be
better opportunity to do relative comparisons between them.
The license fork, on the other hand ;-).
--
(format nil "~S@~S" "cbbrowne" "cbbrowne.com")
http://linuxdatabases.info/info/
Epistemology in One Lesson
Reality ruthlessly selects out creatures that embody hypotheses too
inconsistent with reality. Our only choice is whether we participate
by being selected out, or (in Popper's great phrase) by "letting our
ideas die in our stead."
-- Mark Miller