On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 08:43:04AM -0400, mlw wrote:
> Jim Mercer wrote:
> > why does it have to be THE BEST ? that is insulting to the other projects
> > like MySQL which while "competitors" are also a valid and useful benchmark
> > for features, performance and keeping the postgresql community on its
> > collective toes.
>
> This is interesting, a mission statement isn't necessarily about "what is" but
> about what we "want to do," what it is that we "intend to do," i.e. "our
> mission." It is vital that a mission statement contain the superlatives.
> Mediocrity has no place here.
>
> I don't know about you, but I want PostgreSQL to be the best, be THE most
> reliable. Omitting "best" or "most" from the statement means that we should
> all just give up now, because PostgreSQL is pretty damn good already.
i think a mission statement full of boastfulness is just a sound bite, and
will be dismissed as such.
if you want the mission statement to have an impact, then it needs to be
acceptable not only to those who fully embrace it, but also acceptable to
those who will respect the project from a distance.
otherwise its not a mission statement, its akin to a corporate cheer.
( i'm picturing Steve Balmer's superlative exhaltations to the converted http://www.ntk.net/ballmer/mirrors.html )
--
[ Jim Mercer jim@reptiles.org +1 416 410-5633 ]
[ I want to live forever, or die trying. ]
