Re: 9.5 Release press coverage - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Umair Shahid <umair.shahid@gmail.com> wrote:
> While such an implication is certainly not fair, when a statement like
> "Latest version from EnterpriseDB includes a focus on big data and the
> enterprise with row-level security and BRIN indexing" is the opening line of
> an article, good people who have done good work on the release but don't
> work at EDB have all the right to be upset.

You're right.  On the other hand, maybe good people who have done work
on the release but DO work at EnterpriseDB also have a right to be
upset.  Several developers from other companies got mentioned by name
in the postgresql.org release announcement, together with their
company affiliations, but neither EnterpriseDB itself nor any
EnterpriseDB employee nor any EnterpriseDB contribution are mentioned
there, yet I seem to recall doing an enormous amount of work on
PostgreSQL 9.5.  That work includes, among other things, significant
work on scalability that increases performance very significantly on
large installations, and reviewing and committing lots of patches,
including lots of patches by people who don't work here.

And it's not like EnterpriseDB is alone in not getting credit.  Tom
Lane isn't credited, and neither is Andres, but both of them are
absolutely critical community members with whom, I think it is fair to
say, the release would be much worse than it is.  Personally, I think
it is a mistake to make our release announcements as commercial as
this one clearly is.  Some developers get credit by name and company,
and others aren't mentioned at all, and in my view there's not very
much correlation between depth of contribution and inclusion in the
announcement.  And I would venture that far more people are going to
see the release announcement than are going to see that article, so in
my view that's actually a much bigger problem.  Anybody who knows the
community is going to look at that article and say "this is garbage"
and flush it, but the same people are going to look at the release
announcement and note the conspicuous absence of EnterpriseDB (and Tom
and Andres).

> The least EDB can do is get the
> article redacted and issue an apology to the community assuring them that
> this will not happen again. Explanations about how EDB pays PR and they are
> just human isn't helping ...

I object to this for a couple of reasons.  First, I've already said
that we don't have editorial control over the article and several
other prominent community members working at other PostgreSQL
companies have confirmed that this matches their own experience.  So
you're asserting that the least we should do is more than the most
that we and other community members are saying is possible.  In other
words, you seem to be asserting that the statements we made, and Josh
and J.D. supported, are knowingly false.  I have a number of vices,
and many people on this list know what some of those vices are.
However, I am not a liar.

Second, it is unreasonable for a promise that nobody will ever again
publish an article that makes EnterpriseDB sound more important than
it actually is.  That would require us to have perfect editorial
control not only over this journalist, but over all journalists.  If
you can explain how our PR department is supposed to accomplish that,
I am sure they will be all ears.  To me, it sounds like you are asking
for the impossible.

Third, you used to work at EnterpriseDB.  If, as I'm sure somebody
here will be quick to assert, this is part of a pattern of
EnterpriseDB conduct that is easily fixed by some simple action,
perhaps you should have taken that action while you were here.  If, on
the other hand, this is an isolated incident, then I really don't see
a need for anybody to fall on their sword.

Personally, I think all of this finger-pointing is both overblown and
mostly pointing in the wrong direction, for the reasons articulated
above.  I suggest we get back to the business of promoting PostgreSQL
and check whatever antagonism there may be between our respective
employers up to friendly competition.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company