Re: 9.5 Release press coverage - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy
From | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Subject | Re: 9.5 Release press coverage |
Date | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoaOvUuM+c0kVYyYwTOzUFuHkroqO3dANdxBy4CMe5HJxg@mail.gmail.com Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: 9.5 Release press coverage (Umair Shahid <umair.shahid@gmail.com>) |
List | pgsql-advocacy |
On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 5:24 AM, Umair Shahid <umair.shahid@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks, Robert, for addressing all concerns raised on this forum > point-by-point. It helps tremendously to gain a better understanding. Good to hear. > Your concern here is as valid as the concern I have, I fully support you on > this. Perhaps, as you have suggested yourself, organizations should not be > mentioned at all in press releases from the community. I hope to see more discussion of this point. > What I did mean was that besides the lengthy explanations (which do help, > btw!), I would also like to know what efforts EDB is putting in to try and > not have a repeat of this. It would be helpful, as an example, to know if > you have communicated this discussion & concerns internally. First, Renee reads this list regularly. She may respond to this thread in due course, but I think our marketing team is not quite used to the lightning-fast speed at which community business is sometimes conducted. Please be assured, however, that whether you see a written response or not, the message is being received loud and clear in Bedford. I don't need to tell them about this thread: they know. I often hear about pgsql-advocacy threads critical of EnterpriseDB through the grapevine before I see them in my own email. Second, whenever I have concerns, I let the marketing team know about them. I know Bruce does as well. EnterpriseDB is a big enough company that I'm not aware of every conversation that everyone has with marketing, but I suspect there are also other people who are in touch with them as things come up. Third, marketing reaches out to me from time to time even if I don't contact them, to solicit my opinions on how the community will likely react to A, B, or C. And I always make liaising with them a priority among my various duties. > With the explanations you gave, I understand better that this can not be > guaranteed. I am sure, however, that there are steps that EDB can take to > try and avoid such stuff. As an example, when talking to journalists, they > can make sure the interviewee is very clear about PostgreSQL being a > community effort, rather than an EDB product. As has already been said, this is standard policy here. > Now that’s getting personal, but that’s ok. Yes, I used to work at EDB ... 5 > years ago ... when this wasn't a problem. The posturing was very different > back then, community members on EDB's payroll were constantly and actively > advising the team on what the community might get offended by and what type > of statements to avoid. Is that still happening? Yes. Also, BTW, it looks to me as though the article has been at least partially corrected since we've been arguing about this. It's a real shame that this thread has been completely derailed into a discussion of the one article that got it wrong instead of talking about the original purpose, which was the press coverage this release has gratifyingly received. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company/
pgsql-advocacy by date: