Re: [HACKERS] SAP and MySQL ... [and Benchmark] - Mailing list pgsql-general
From | Robert Treat |
---|---|
Subject | Re: [HACKERS] SAP and MySQL ... [and Benchmark] |
Date | |
Msg-id | 1055514791.7070.461.camel@camel Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: [HACKERS] SAP and MySQL ... [and Benchmark] (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Responses |
Re: [HACKERS] SAP and MySQL ... [and Benchmark]
Re: [HACKERS] SAP and MySQL ... [and Benchmark] Re: [HACKERS] SAP and MySQL ... [and Benchmark] |
List | pgsql-general |
On Fri, 2003-06-13 at 01:08, Tom Lane wrote: > Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org> writes: > > On Thursday 12 June 2003 13:29, Justin Clift wrote: > >> Getting involvement in this from the PostgreSQL Advocacy and Marketing > >> group would be extremely beneficial as well, as it's presently lacking > >> vision, coherent plans and goals to bring the vision to reality, and > >> consistent effort by all but a handful of members. Good leadership + > >> direction would be welcome there and should be included in the PostgreSQL > >> "core" group as well. > > > Is Marc or Bruce not a part of the 'Advocacy and Marketing Group' already? > > Let the Advocacy and Marketing group make their suggestions in the open forum > > of Hackers and see what is thought of it, just like everything else that has > > been done to this database. There are five people on core; their skilset is > > varied enough to where any single point of view isn't dominant. > > Actually I think Justin has a point: the core team consists of hackers. > I believe we do a decent job of leading technical development of > Postgres, but we're not well-qualified to lead marketing efforts. > Tom, you may not be qualified, but you have an uncanny ability to give sage advice ;-) > It doesn't, however, follow that adding some marketing experts to core > would improve matters. I think it'd just fragment our attention. > There's an advocacy/marketing group in place already, and it seems to > me they should just take the ball and run with it. They don't need > core's approval to do the things they can do well. > But we do need core's approval to add legitimacy to our efforts, especially with some of the "marketing is bad" folks that live on -hackers. We also need core's approval to get infrastructure changes put into place to help our efforts. > I wouldn't mind seeing a "core marketing" team evolve to parallel the > existing "core technical" team. But it won't happen by vote. To the > extent that the hackers community listens to core on technical issues, > it's because we've achieved respect by hard work. The core marketing > team has to step forward and win their credibility the same way. > This overlooks the fact that you can't earn credibility with some of our community unless you hack on the back-end. The uproar over the 7.3 press release was a fine example of what happens when the "advocacy" guys try to make a change to something non-technical that the "technical" guys don't approve of. Robert Treat -- Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
pgsql-general by date: