On Thu, 2 May 2002, mlw wrote:
> Jim Mercer wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 08:15:15AM -0400, mlw wrote:
> > > Jean-Michel POURE wrote:
> > > > Le Jeudi 2 Mai 2002 01:59, David Terrell a �crit :
> > > > > "Provide a really good database and have fun doing it"
> > > >
> > > > PostgreSQL Community is commited to providing Humanity with the best
> > > > multi-purpose, reliable, open-source and free database system.
> > >
> > >
> > > The PostgreSQL community is committed to creating and maintaining the best,
> > > most reliable, open-source multi-purpose standards based database, and with
> > > it, promote free and open source software world wide.
> > >
> > > Who's that? Anyone disagree?
> >
> > 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.
altho in most contexts, I would agree with Jim as to the use of 'The
Best', for any mission statement to say anything other then that, IMHO,
shows a lack of commitment ... I agree with mlw on this one, the mission
statement is what we are *striving* for ... where we eventually want to
get to ... if we aren't "The Best", then there is someone better then us
that we have to work that much harder to become better then ...
I personally like mlw's wording ...
