Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> > In general, I think that people who harp on PostgreSQL's lack of a
> > benevolent dictator as an inhibitor to progress are people who are not
> > comfortable with democracy and are looking for excuses why company X needs
> > to "take over the project for its own good."
>
> I don't recall having seen that idea being pushed for Postgres ... not
> seriously anyway. However, it's certainly true that historically we've
> had effectively *no* project leadership, in the sense of anyone setting
> feature goals for releases or creating a long-term roadmap. Would we
> be better off if we had done that? I'm not sure.
>
> It's pointless to suppose that individual developers would really be
> answerable to any project-wide management, since that's not who they're
> paid by. So I tend to think that a project roadmap would be more of an
> exercise in wishful thinking than a useful management tool. OTOH it
> *could* be useful, if there are any developers out there wondering what
> they should work on next. Are there any ... and would they listen to a
> roadmap if they had one, rather than scratching their own itches?
I think the longer someone is with the project the more they start
working on what is good for the project, rather than what interests
them. I think we have seen many cases of that.
--
Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
