Merlin Moncure wrote:
> I'll take a slightly more optimistic view. I personally (and I imagine
> most of the tech community would agree) have no problem with people
> trying to make a buck or two. It was their business decisions that are
> hurting (and continue to hurt them), most especially their threatening
> to get rid of the lgpl license for the non-static libs. That was a
> total PHB maneuver. This hurt their credibility with the php community,
> whose members are their core supporters. (PHB thinks: they don't pay,
> so who cares?)
Well, don't forget.. MySQL AB has a product now which surpasses postgresql in
feature, at least in some areas. It is called MaxDB..-)
> This is in stark contrast to the PostgreSQL developers, whose
> egalitarian methods and decentralized development style reflect the very
> spirit about what is 'open source'. This is reflected in slashdot,
> which is the mouthpiece of the liberal spirit of the OSS movement.
> Also, while not as widely deployed, postgres has a better educated, more
> thoughtful, and generally better paid user base and therefore is not
> exactly the 'underdog' of oss databases despite lacking repeated the
> bleating in the increasingly useless technical press that mysql enjoys.
IMO, we should get above that. PostgreSQL succeeds not because it is open source
but because it works.(Or thankfully does not work at all when it does not work.
It is the gray area that causes pain..)
Postgresql being open source and being successful are two absolutely differnt
things.
Yes. It does help it become successful by being open source. But that is not the
topmost reason for being successful. Certainly not.
Shridhar
