On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 09:20:26 -0800 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
wrote:
>The license may allow it, but you really need a fair amount of
>chutzpah
>to expect that people help you with it ...
Hah...I certainly agree.
Keep in mind though...we're not actually selling them the database.
It's not my intention to rebrand the database and *sell* it.
We simply want to use PostgreSQL to leverage our application's
capabilities. The app currently runs on the customer's supplied
databases (Sybase, Oracle, and Access (gulp) in a few sites). We're
not proposing to charge them for the database, and believe me, they
wouldn't buy in. They already have to part of the game covered.
I'm a long time user, and fan, and a open source advocate in
general. I think PostgreSQL is the way of the future. I'm also the
shot caller primarily on our app's technology, and I'd like to
standardize as much as possible on developing solely for
PostgreSQL. The multi db support has provided an endless supply of
headaches. We can provide PostgreSQL for free to the customer, and
most have been very open to the idea. We'll provide what
administration is needed.
There are a few obstinate anti-open source customers though, that
prevent my plan from moving forward. They've bought into whatever
hype they've read and just simply say no. Now, that said, they're
fairly non-technical and probably had never heard of PostgreSQL
before we presented our plan.
So, is it a little shady to want to slide PostgreSQL in under the
radar? I'm simply trying to downplay what it is...it's my take that
what they don't know won't hurt them.
Sounds like rebranding would be a significantly difficult task.
Perhaps I'll just remove all menu entries and leave it at that.
Any thoughts or suggestions are appreciated. And please, don't take
offense to the question ;)
Thanks,
John
Concerned about your privacy? Instantly send FREE secure email, no account required
http://www.hushmail.com/send?l=480
Get the best prices on SSL certificates from Hushmail
https://www.hushssl.com?l=485
