Let me expand a bit on Dan's answer.First, as Michael Yoon points out on the aD site's version of thisthread, aD has spent time talking to Ben about issues like PL/SQL.Overall, PL/SQL isn't a big issue - it's a bit more work (Tcl scriptsrun unchanged except for queries, while PL/SQL needs to be translatedinto PL/pgSQL, normally easy but still not zero-cost). We've got asolution for Java thanks to Dan - better than SQLJ, IMO, anyway.And the basic architecture of ACS 4.0, with a core which provides adefined API for packages, is a big improvement over ACS 3.0. In asense this saves us work - Ben and I (and others) were talking aboutforking OpenACS several months ago specifically to address issueswhich 4.0 tackles. At the time, it didn't appear that aD was going toaddress core architecture issues, so we're very glad they have.Also aD - at least parts of aD - have recognized the importance ofsupporting Open Source RDBMS systems as well as Oracle. The dynamicsbetween those that care about this issue within aD, and those thatdon't, aren't terribly clear to me as an outsider but we now haveSebastian given the job of managing an InterBase port within theOpenACS framework. That's great.A bigger issue to me is the apparent long-term plan to abandon Tcl infavor of Java (Yoon's post over on the aD dev forum set forth a planfor finishing a Java-only version, and IMO they'd be stupid to spendmoney to support both versions). I'm uninterested in distractionssuch as this, IIS-support, Apache support etc - AOLserver+Tcl+ACS+PGworks great for me, and I only need a single Open Source solution todo the things I want to do on the web.But, that's my narrow, somewhat selfish POV :)
