Chris Browne wrote:
>ajs@crankycanuck.ca (Andrew Sullivan) writes:
>
>
>>On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 09:49:28AM -0400, Rick Morris wrote:
>>
>>
>>>- Thus, taking the above under advisement, it would seem best not to
>>>fight MySQL on their ground, nor to spend much time on feature
>>>distinction, but to forge more serious relationships with organizations
>>>who have serious needs.
>>>
>>>
>>I think this is a capital idea. It seems this is a place to focus.
>>
>>
>
>Absolutely.
>
>The same would be true of "fighting Oracle on their ground."
>
>One thought suggested by someone outside of "the community" is that
>one of the things that the various "more popular" systems have gotten
>'right' is the notion of having a "Foo Press" that is responsible for
>deploying books about their systems.
>
>This is true for various values of "Foo" including the members of the
>set {"Microsoft", "Oracle", "MySQL"}.
>
>Contrast with some systems that people hardly ever hear of...
> - There is exactly ONE book available on MaxDB, by No Starch Press
> - There is exactly ONE book available on SQLite, by New Riders
> - APress has ONE book on Firebird...
> - It is not comforting that O'Reilly only has one PostgreSQL book :-(
>
>One "capital idea" might well be to establish a "PostgreSQL Press,"
>whether in cooperation with an existing publisher or otherwise. The
>timing of this would be pretty critical; we're likely at a fairly
>critical point in time for it now, for it to happen or not.
>
>
Is there any reason why this could not be a function of the advocacy
group? The revenue generated would thereby be able to go back directly
into the advocacy project :-) I am thinking of publishing libre
documentation for a price, advertising it, and using the revenue to
further promote PostgreSQL.....
I thought about getting into this sort of market but it seems a bit of
trouble for me at the moment and well outside my core business focus.
Best WIshes,
Chris Travers
Metatron Technology Consulting
