Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>> > >> Me too. How about something along the lines of "Postgresql is
>> > >> supported by several different companies, ensuring that no one
>> > >> company can drive the project in any one direction against the best
>> > >> interests of the community"?
>> > >
>> > > How about:
>> > >
>> > > Me too. How about something along the lines of "Postgresql is
>> > > supported by several different companies, preventing vendor
>> > > lock-in. ..........................
>> >
>> > I rather like a wording like...
>> >
>> > "Support for PostgreSQL development and deployment is provided by a
>> > number of different companies, alleviating the risks associated with
>> > products controlled exclusively by a single vendor."
>>
>> I like this wording ... "preventing vendor lock-in" doesn't have a nice
>> ring to it ...
>
> Agreed. The newest wording is best. I only suggested my wording
> because "ensuring that no one company can drive the project in any one
> direction against the best interests of the community" sounded like
> "ensuring that the car will not drive off a cliff".
>
Isn't it the cars that too many or nobody is driving, that end up
falling off the cliffs?
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #
