Thread: FAQ or so?

Hi folks,

    maybe is this a so long debated subject.. But maybe is it a good
starting point to refresh all the demonstrations points of PostgreSQL
advocacy or PostgreSQL-vs-xx arguments. It may be usefull for me (and I
believe other people here) to be able to argue on various points just
like the eternal « what about the responsabilities issues ? » or « who
will be responsible for xxx ? » (that's my discussion today, but it can
be another-day/thread for other points).

    While discussing with other IT-people in different country (US, CA,
FR), the responsability issue is always put on the top of the problems
of IT-directors each time you talk about PostgreSQL migration. This kind
of problem is now more sensible than in the past because, from my point
of view, there is lesser technical problem to migrate to PG now (I mean
there's plenty of (very good) technical reasons to migrate from an
another proprietary/opensource database management system).

    The problem is more on the policy side (or «politics» as we use to
say in France), and I would like to have some others arguments than,
just contact a service co. to get some support/responsibility for
PostgreSQL. Any answer I get back from this arguments is that there's
_no_ real editor to put the blame (i.e. get money back) on. I'm not
quite experienced on this field, but I heard a lot of people here in
France saying that End User License tells users that the editor is not
responsible of malfunctions or deasaster liable to the software they are
using. I can argue this, but people still believe that accepting such
licences give them the ability to lead the  editor to the court.

    More generaly, this is an OpenSource question. But PostgreSQL case
is more sensible from my point of view because, large scale migration is
about to be done in France (on the country administration side btw) and
no direction or no project manager wants to handle (or endorse) the
responsability of PostgreSQL migration or choice (whereas they could
handle it technically).

    My question is, how can I refine my arguments, do you have others
arguments I can use? What could we say about responsabilities issue
regarding to  PG? How can I better advocate on PG -more generally- ?

    I hope it won't be an off topic discussion (well, I would'nt post
this message to -hackers ;) ). Moreover, please "pardon my French".

    Thanks a lot for any answer :)

--
Jean-Christophe Arnu
Secretary
PostgreSQLFr - French PostgreSQL Association

>    My question is, how can I refine my arguments, do you have others
> arguments I can use? What could we say about responsabilities issue
> regarding to  PG? How can I better advocate on PG -more generally- ?

The Oracle and Microsoft and IBM database licenses will all disclaim any
responsibility for your data loss.  You cannot get money off them or sue
them for loss either.

Chris

On Wed, 2005-02-23 at 04:30, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> >    My question is, how can I refine my arguments, do you have others
> > arguments I can use? What could we say about responsabilities issue
> > regarding to  PG? How can I better advocate on PG -more generally- ?
>
> The Oracle and Microsoft and IBM database licenses will all disclaim any
> responsibility for your data loss.  You cannot get money off them or sue
> them for loss either.
>

This should probably be point number one because it points out that
these people have been operating under these conditions for years and so
there isn't likely to be a change legally for them. They actually
probably been living under even worse than that.  Take the Micro$oft
Windows Refund issue, where in the EULA they specifically state that if
you don't use the OS you can return it for a full refund, and yet
countless numbers of people have tried and been unsuccessful in getting
those refunds due to the hoops their corporate lawyers make you jump
through... and remember this is when they have an agreement up front to
give you money back.

I think the situation actually improves when you choose software like
postgresql because you have a choice of vendors to get support from, so
you can look for vendors to take on as much responsibility as you need.
If you pick $ql $server and have a problem with Micro$oft support, where
else are you going to turn?  This actually isn't just a problem for
commercial software; even software like my$ql or ingres have the issue
of very tight vendor control, so your options are limited.  With
postgresql you have the ability to hit people where they really feel it,
and that is by taking away future business, and it is not an empty
threat because you can switch to another postgresql service provider and
not have to change a single line of code.


Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL

Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:

>>    My question is, how can I refine my arguments, do you have others
>> arguments I can use? What could we say about responsabilities issue
>> regarding to  PG? How can I better advocate on PG -more generally- ?
>
> The Oracle and Microsoft and IBM database licenses will all disclaim any
> responsibility for your data loss.  You cannot get money off them or sue
> them for loss either.

The (small) threat to be sued might be an incentive for a commercial vendor
to help the customer anyway.

You might need to tell this people that they could provide plenty of
incentive to a open source community by supporting it openly with whatever
means they have. This way they might never need commercial support at all.
Keep in mind: This support is not necessarily financial.

Uli