Re: Time to work on Press Release 8.0 - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > What typically happens is that the company has had 1-2 years to recover
> > their costs and make a profit, and they usually donate the code to the
> > project, give us the code to take the parts we can make use of, or just
> > abandon the project and move all their customers to the community
> > solution.  However, sometimes things don't work that cleanly.
> >
> > Do we promote proprietary add-on software, and if so, how?  And if there
> > are similar open-source solutions, does that affect the issue?
>
> Well let me be clear on a couple of things with this.
>
> 1. I do not expect the community to be Command Prompt's marketing arm.
> 2. I do not expect better billing than an OSS component.
>
> The most obvious example of course is what started all of this which
> was Slony-I/Mammoth Replicator.
>
> I have zero problem with the mention, of Slony in the press release. I
> do believe that it is a good product and CMD will make a ton of money
> supporting it. So the more presence it receives the better.
>
> However, I also believe that Mammoth Replicator would deserve equal
> mention, especially since Mammoth Replicator is more mature and they
> really are different products that serve a similar but not identical
> purpose.

So even though Slony is free and open source and Mammoth Replicator is
proprietary, you think we should give them equal mention?

By that logic, if Powergres was based on 8.0 code, we would mention that
along with the Win32 port mention?  That doesn't make sense to me.

(Powergres is threaded so it would have some distinction compared to our
community Win32 implementation.)

> Also specifically for 8.0 it may be of interest to note that Slony won't
> currently run on what is about to be our most popular platform, Windows.
> However Mammoth Replicator will.
>
> So in answer to your second question, I would say no I don't believe
> that it effects the issue. If there is an OSS component that serves the
> same purpose by all means reflect that. I just feel that we may be
> potentially ignoring a very important piece of the community by not
> highlighting closed source products that utilize PostgreSQL.
>
> I would say, either promote all relevant add on software or promote none.

Again, you make no distinction between propriety and free software, even
though our community is about free software, and not proprietary
software.  That seem like a disconnect to me.

--
  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