Simon,
* Simon Riggs (simon@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> On 13 September 2017 at 23:55, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 9:06 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> >> On 12 September 2017 at 13:11, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
> >>> If they really wanted to contrast 'open source commitment' between the
> >>> various vendors, they probably should have considered including the
> >>> company that actually commits the most code to PG too, but that's
> >>> starting to show my own bias.
> >>
> >> It certainly would be very generous of you to mention 2ndQuadrant, thank you.
[...]
> If you look at 2017 in first 8 months, the figures for commits at
> least are different. Certainly when I checked to see if Stephen was
> correct, I saw that 2ndQuadrant had committed more than Crunchy. I
> haven't checked against EDB, but no doubt you will and I wish you good
> luck. I'm sure things will change again in the future.
To be clear, I did not make any statement as to who did what when, and
that was my intent because I wasn't looking to start a thread about
stats but rather to try and make exactly the point that there are
multiple companies which deserve mention when it comes to the discussion
of who contributes to moving PostgreSQL forward.
I certainly wouldn't have complained at all if the original article
under discussion here had looked at 2017-to-date, or 2016-to-date, or
any other reasonable time range to draw their conclusion from about
which companies contribute to PG development, the complaint here is that
they didn't appear to do any such analysis, nor did they even
acknowledge that multiple companies are involved in PG development, and
that's what I find particularly unfortunate.
Thanks!
Stephen
