Re: [HACKERS] Decision Process WAS: Increased company involvement - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy
From | Robert Treat |
---|---|
Subject | Re: [HACKERS] Decision Process WAS: Increased company involvement |
Date | |
Msg-id | 200505022002.19714.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: [HACKERS] Decision Process WAS: Increased company involvement ("Dave Held" <dave.held@arraysg.com>) |
Responses |
Re: [HACKERS] Decision Process WAS: Increased company involvement
|
List | pgsql-advocacy |
On Monday 02 May 2005 17:32, Dave Held wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:pgman@candle.pha.pa.us] > > Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 3:33 PM > > To: Dave Held > > Cc: PostgreSQL advocacy; PostgreSQL-development > > Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [HACKERS] Decision Process WAS: > > Increased > > company involvement > > > > [...] > > Here is a new FAQ entry: > > > > <H3><A name="1.13">1.13</A>) Who controls PostgreSQL?<BR> > > > > <P>If you are looking for a PostgreSQL gatekeeper, > > central committee, or controlling company, give up, because > > none exists. We do have a core committee and CVS committers, > > but these groups are more for administrative purposes then > > control. The project is directed by the open community of > > developers and users of PostgreSQL. Everyone is welcome to > > subscribe and take part in the discussions. (See the > > <a href="http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs.FAQ_DEV.html"> > > Developer's FAQ</A> for information on how to get > > involved in PostgreSQL development.)</P> > > > > Adjustments? > > "...are more for administrative purposes [then->than] control..." > > <p>Because PostgreSQL is a monolithic product, all of its features > must work together in tight harmony. It is in the interests of > the PostgreSQL community that new features be integrated in a way > that preserves this harmony. Thus, new feature proposals are > scrutinized and debated by the community to ensure that changes > have sufficient technical merit. Be prepared to defend your > proposal, and don't assume that a privately developed contribution > will automatically be accepted by the PostgreSQL community. To > maximize the chance of success in proposing a change, consider > these suggestions: > > * Propose your change/feature publicly - OSS is about community, > and a collection of contributors working independently without > communication is not a community; this avoids duplication of > effort and promotes collaboration/cooperation among parties > that have a common interest > * Research your proposal to see if it has already been discussed > on the mailing list > * Research your proposed solution to make sure it is the best of > breed - database technology is a very active subject of > academic research, and it is possible, if not likely, that > someone has written a paper on the topic > * Engage the community by participating in discussions and patch > reviews - your credibility as a contributor depends on your > willingness to contribute to the community in non-coding > ways as well > </p> > > I realize that this runs a bit far afield from the original > question of "Who controls PostgreSQL?", but I think it addresses > the points that someone who asks this question is likely to > want to know. It also tackles the contribution question from > a higher level than the dev-faq. Actually I think Bruces blurb is good for the general FAQ, and this would be good for the Developer FAQs -- Robert Treat Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
pgsql-advocacy by date: