Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> >Yes, we could do that, but with structure, there comes power, and with
> >power, arguments. Is it worth the risk?
> >
> >
> >
> Probably not. Who would be a part of it?
>
> PgSQL, Command Prompt, Red Hat, SRA? Seems like a pretty big hassle.
>
> >I would like to see more benefit than just certification before I think
> >such a bureaucracy is worth it.
> >
> >
> >
> Personally, I don't see a need. There are two Linux certifications of any
> relevance, only one of those actually matters (yes I know I contradicted
> myself).
> That is the RedHat one.
>
> Also, although certification has some merit I would rather see our attention
> go more towards marketing and converting developers.
One more point --- I often get questions from folks no familiar with
open source who want to know who controls PostgreSQL (of course, no
one). But, if we had a foundation, even in name only, they would think
the foundation controls PostgreSQL development and features. They just
_want_ to think someone is in central control, and having a foundation
just confuses the issue. They have to understand PostgreSQL is run by
consensus and anything that confuses that makes our job harder in
getting them to understand open source. I just had a conference call
today where this exact confusion came up.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
