On Thursday 12 June 2003 08:40, Justin Clift wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I assume we don't want to mimick FreeBSD's infighting.
> >
> > I don't have any problem with doing voting, but I will say that the
> > stated PostgreSQL core leadership goal, "to do as little as possible",
> > has served us well.
> Or not.
Each Open Source project has its own personality. I often use PostgreSQL as
an example of a well-run OSS project; I do believe that the current model is
working well.
I understand some of the concerns with the current model. However, this
database started as a research project, was picked up by a couple of students
and SQLified, then was picked up by a core group of its users who were
interested in making it better. And make it better they did! (with help of
course). Prolific developers have since been added to the core group.
This model has gotten us this far very well; and I don't think a fundamental
change in it is necessary to take us to the next level.
Or, to put it another way, we have a minimalistic 'government'. Some people
like that; others do not. Just as in the 'real world'. The user base,
moderated by core, makes the decisions -- I believe that is as it should be.
Somewhat like cadmium in a nuclear reactor. (:-)) Core prevents a meltdown,
and lets the reactor hum at a nice pace.
We want marketing? The someone steps up to the plate and markets (which has
happened). We want funding? Then some of our users need to step up to the
plate and do some funding. (which has also happened).
To borrow from another projects model, no one is asking Linus Torvalds to
accept a voted-in core team for the Linux kernel. He is also one who governs
as little as possible.
We're not commercial software; why must we act like commercial software?
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11
