On Wed, 26 Jul 2006, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Thomas Hallgren wrote:
>>> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Which version of Replication do we throw in here?
>>>>
>>> IMHO, the current players should be encouraged create a joint portfolio
>>> that makes sense.
>>
>> All due respect but that is a pipe dream.
>>
> Given todays organization yes. Given a more elaborated organization that
> encourages efforts like that, absolutely not.
>
> Assume that we had something called the "PostgreSQL utility portfolio". I.e.
> an official set of utilities published in such a way that there's no doubt
> that they are endorsed by a PostgreSQL community board.
>
> Add a process where proposals for inclusion can be turned in for review.
>
> Finally assume that the community board, when similar proposals arrive, will
> encourage the proposing parties to merge on the thesis that cooperation is
> far more productive than a beauty contest (well most of the time anyway).
>
> I promise you that a) it would have the desired effect and b) it is not just
> a dream. Other projects do this already. Why would it be so impossible for
> us?
'k, so ... why don't you form this "community board"? Bring in like
minded individuals, set up a project on pgFoundry to organize it and do
exactly what you are proposing?
The point is ... nobody is stopping anyone from doing this, so why hasn't
anyone done it? Why haven't you run with it and done it?
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org
Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664
