Re: modules

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> On Thu, 3 Apr 2008 13:54:11 -0000
>> "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Right now contrib is a real catch-all of various things; it would
>>> be nice to categorize them somehow. And by categorize, I
>>> emphatically do NOT mean move to pgfoundry, which is pretty much a
>>> kiss of death.
>
> Pgfoundry is not a kiss of death except that you spread falsehoods like
> that. PGfoundry is a very alive project that is constantly adding
> content and has continuing and very active projects.

+1.
This modules/packages concept seems 100% orthogonal to pgfoundry to me.

Pgfoundry seems like a bug-tracking / development infrastructure
somewhat like sourceforge. Some modules might want to use it,
some might not (no doubt postgis would stay with refractions, etc).

This hypothetical modules project is more focused on installers,
and perhaps ways to find and run the module installers whether
from pgfoundry or elsewhere.

Ron

PS: Regarding pgfoundry and credibility; it seems the stature
and image of pgfoundry would go up a lot if postgresql itself
were hosted there. But no, I'm not advocating that.