On Fri, Jun 20, 2003 at 11:14:02PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > There are some, but I still disagree. The biggest advantage of
> > PostgreSQL in my opinion has always been that it's a community project
> > and not driven by some commercial interests.
>
> These are not mutually exclusive. Each developer has his own axe to
> grind, without doubt; I don't think it matters much whether his goals
Okay, that's true.
Actually what I wanted to say is the project must not rely on a kind
of sponsorship. Maybe an example could make it more clear. Let's say a
company approaches RH and says "We need full replication and we're
willing to pay for it, as this is still cheaper than buying the hwole
stuff from Oracle or others.". Then RH pays you to do the work. I really
like that. And it makes sense for all companies involved.
What I do not like, and probably misunderstood in the original email,
would be if RH says, "Hey, we've contracted a good software developer
to implement replication, no matter that he's not really interested
in databases." And with no one paying RH for this work, they may decide
at some point to just stop it. Or the developer leaves, etc. This of
course is different than paying someone who's already a developer in
this project.
I love the way PGSQL is run, but have seen some unbelievable stuff in
other projects. And it despises me to see companies, that do not even
understand how free software development works, jump into a project and
try to change it all, just to disappear after a few weeks.
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Email: Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De
ICQ: 179140304, AIM: michaelmeskes, Jabber: meskes@jabber.org
Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!
