Re: Vote on Windows installer links - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy
From | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Vote on Windows installer links |
Date | |
Msg-id | 200907082225.n68MPYo10278@momjian.us Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Vote on Windows installer links (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
List | pgsql-advocacy |
Jussi Mikkola wrote: > Hi, > > Ok, I think the original question was that does EDB get too much > visibility versus other contributors, because they happen to > work on the installer and their logo is seen there. Is that too > much compared to people/companies that work on something else > that is not so visible. For example parallel restore. > > Now, in my opinion the approach has been that should EDB visibility > be reduced so that it is on the same level that others are. But, > as I see it, there are two separate issues. One is, that is EDB > visibility fair compared to others, and the other point is that > how much that visibility should be. > > Sofar, it seems that people have the idea that commercial support > is bad and that we should limit the visibility of companies on > PostgreSQL website or sites related to it. In my opinion there > is also another possibility, to increase the visibility of > others. Isn't it good for the community, if there are many > companies working on PostgreSQL? If that is good, then why don't > we show that? And if we get more companies involved by showing > that they have done something for the project, isn't that a good > thing? > > Now, the installer is visible. What if we would give there credit > to more companies that have helped the project, rather than > removing any? And, yes, if the commercial alternative costs x > k?, I think you can look 10 secs of adds when installing an open > source one. Wow, that is interesting. I think you are right that the visibility of the installer is asymetric with the visibility of some other community contributions. I think that is related to the general issue that _edge_ features get more visibility than core stuff --- we do major stuff with the optimizer in every release but it rarely gets much release note mention --- it just works better. (In fact sometimes I add it and Tom removes it.) pgadmin, which is much simpler than the core code, gets more flash attention than the backend. I think this is happening because we _don't_ try to get involved in balancing visibility stuff. The external stuff is by its very nature external and gets more visibility. I think it is admirable if we can get backend stuff more company visibility, if we can figure out a clean way to do it. Right now it works because we _don't_ inject ourselves into that. Let me also add that I get more visibility in the release notes than is warranted because I tend to do more user-facing, edge stuff, which is unfair, but when we try to be fair we end up with release notes that seem distored. We did talk about this a while ago. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
pgsql-advocacy by date: