On Mon, 17 Apr 2006, Robert Treat wrote:
> On Monday 17 April 2006 12:22, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006, Robert Treat wrote:
>>> On Monday 17 April 2006 08:36, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
>>>> On 4/17/06, Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> Marc already did.
>>>>
>>>> I admit, registering the trademark is valid for legal reasons. I was
>>>> making a point of absurdity.
>>>
>>> That is is better to allow companies like microsoft or mysql to become
>>> the defacto oraganization for getting "postgresql-anything" rather than
>>> allowing the established postgresql community to have some influence over
>>> things?
>>
>> Hasn't SRA been offering certification for awhile now?
>>
>
> Yes (I happen to be a SRA PostgreSQL Certified Engineer, and encourage others
> to get certified) but (taking Jonah's absurd postulate to the other extreme)
> if micrsoft were to desire it, they could easily start up thier own
> certification for postgresql and probably fairly quickly have numbers over
> SRA.
>
> While i don't believe that will happen, there are some scenarios floating
> around about them doing a msose (microsoft open source engineer) where people
> would certify knowledge of key components of open source software running on
> windows platforms or interacting with windows products (think setting up an
> open source mail system with exchange at the heart of it). PostgreSQL comes
> into this picture generally as a way to combat mysql from eating up the low
> end market that sql server used to own. It could lead to some form of
> embracing and extending of postgresql tied back into thier certification; we
> wouldn't be the first bsd licensed application that they have gotten involved
> with.
'k, and this is a bad thing because ... ?
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
