Thread: Joint user survey with EnterpriseDB?
All,
EnterpriseDB would like to do a survey of PostgreSQL users, at least the
ones they can reach through postgresql.org. The results of the survey,
anonymized, will be published under an OSS license for our use.
Under these circumstances, is it OK for EnterpriseDB to use
pgsql-announce, pgsql-general and/or postgresql.org News to advertise
the survey and solicit users for it? My personal thought is "yes". Yours?
List of questions below my signature; suggestions on better questions
welcome!
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
www.pgexperts.com
Questions:
1)Ho w long have you been using PostgreSQL? (pick 1)
2)What do you use PostgreSQL for? (pick n)
3)What other databases do you use in the above capacity? (pick n)
4)What size is your organization in terms of revenue? (pick 1)
=====
For your primary database:
5)How big is the database in GigaBytes? (pick 1)
6)How many end users are supported? (pick 1)
7)How many transactions per day? (pick 1)
8)What hardware platform is it deployed on? (pick 1)
9)What software platform is it deployed on? (pick 1)
10)Do you purchase Subscription Support for PostgreSQL or are you
community/self supported? (pick 1)
11)What is your favorite source of PostgreSQL information and help?
12)What types of applications is the database used for? (pick n)
===== End of Primary Database questions
13)What new / improved database engine features would you like to see in
PostgreSQL? (freeform)
……….
14)What database administration tools/features would you like to see new
or improved in PostgreSQL? (pick n)
What database monitoring tools/features would you like to see new or
improved in PostgreSQL? (pick n)
What new / improved application development features / tools would you
like to see in PostgreSQL? (pick n)
15)I would use Postgres Plus Standard Server if: (freeform)
16)I would use Postgres Plus Advanced Server if: (freeform)
17)Would you like to be contacted and provide us more detailed responses?
Hi!
Josh Berkus wrote:
> EnterpriseDB would like to do a survey of PostgreSQL users, at least the
> ones they can reach through postgresql.org. The results of the survey,
> anonymized, will be published under an OSS license for our use.
That's really cool!
> Under these circumstances, is it OK for EnterpriseDB to use
> pgsql-announce, pgsql-general and/or postgresql.org News to advertise
> the survey and solicit users for it? My personal thought is "yes". Yours?
It's fine until they start using their product names in the survey. At
that point, it's not much better than a push-poll advertising technique.
If those questions which contain specific commercial
product/branding names were removed, I think the survey would be fine.
My other question is how the survey is presented - is it being labeled
as a community produced survey? Or marketing research for Enterprise DB?
-selena
--
Me - http://www.chesnok.com/daily
http://www.opensourcebridge.org
On Thursday 25 June 2009 17:52:57 Josh Berkus wrote: > EnterpriseDB would like to do a survey of PostgreSQL users, at least the > ones they can reach through postgresql.org.... > My personal thought is "yes". Yours? +1 -- Robert Bernier PostgreSQL Business Intelligence Analyst robert.bernier5@sympatico.ca http://pg-live.info
Hell-o Selena Deckelmann escribió: > Hi! > > Josh Berkus wrote: > >> EnterpriseDB would like to do a survey of PostgreSQL users, at least the >> ones they can reach through postgresql.org. The results of the survey, >> anonymized, will be published under an OSS license for our use. > > That's really cool! Considering the fact that it would allow us (the Pg Community) to give a nice survey (i dont know of any yet.. besides the pgsql-cert one...) along with the rest of it (analisys, graphs, and so on... )... and under an OSS liscence... makes it even anazingly cool... >> Under these circumstances, is it OK for EnterpriseDB to use >> pgsql-announce, pgsql-general and/or postgresql.org News to advertise >> the survey and solicit users for it? My personal thought is "yes". Yours? > > It's fine until they start using their product names in the survey. At > that point, it's not much better than a push-poll advertising technique. > If those questions which contain specific commercial > product/branding names were removed, I think the survey would be fine. I would suggest "Would you consider using a commercial standar/advanced server (based on PostgreSQL)... i guess it would be usefull for both... EnterpriseDB and the community... > My other question is how the survey is presented - is it being labeled > as a community produced survey? Or marketing research for Enterprise DB? I have the same question... > -selena > >
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 05:52:57PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > All, > > EnterpriseDB would like to do a survey of PostgreSQL users, at least > the ones they can reach through postgresql.org. The results of the > survey, anonymized, will be published under an OSS license for our > use. > > Under these circumstances, is it OK for EnterpriseDB to use > pgsql-announce, pgsql-general and/or postgresql.org News to > advertise the survey and solicit users for it? My personal thought > is "yes". Yours? It would be nice to get access to the "anonymized" data. I use quotes there because it turns out that anonymity is *very* hard to guarantee while sending out any data at all. It would be interesting to see timestamps on survey submission, for example. > List of questions below my signature; suggestions on better questions > welcome! > > Questions: [cut for brevity. Refer up-thread for the rest] > 15)I would use Postgres Plus Standard Server if: (freeform) > > 16)I would use Postgres Plus Advanced Server if: (freeform) The above two look to me like a lead-in to: > 17)Would you like to be contacted and provide us more detailed responses? This one looks like pure, crystalline sales outreach, which is a perfectly legitimate thing for EnterpriseDB to do. It's likely to skew the results, though, as there is a significant proportion of people being surveyed which does not trust that checking, "no" here will in fact result in, "no" behaviour. That's just generally, although previous EnterpriseDB incidents will almost certainly increase that proportion. Further questions: * How many people are there in your organization? * How many people do you anticipate your organization having this year? * Next year? * Where is your organization located? (pick n) * Which human languages do you need PostgreSQL support for? (pick n) * Of those, which need more support, and what kind? (free form) * Which programming languages do you need PostgreSQL support for? (pick n) * Of those, which need more support, and what kind? (free form) Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fetter@gmail.com Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
On Friday 26. June 2009, Josh Berkus wrote: >For your primary database: > >5)How big is the database in GigaBytes? (pick 1) From this question, I figure that users in the sub-Gigabyte range are not really interesting. For my own part, I've got a primary database of around 50 Megabytes, which is highly organized and mostly input by hand. I suspect there's a lot of 'long-tail' users out there with similar setups. But we'd probably not be very interested in solutions more suitable for multi-GB databases. However, I believe this question will filter out a significant part of the PostgreSQL user base, and raise issues about the validity of the poll results. -- Leif Biberg Kristensen | Registered Linux User #338009 Me And My Database: http://solumslekt.org/blog/
Leif B. Kristensen wrote: > On Friday 26. June 2009, Josh Berkus wrote: >> For your primary database: >> >> 5)How big is the database in GigaBytes? (pick 1) > > From this question, I figure that users in the sub-Gigabyte range are > not really interesting. For my own part, I've got a primary database of > around 50 Megabytes... For that matter, which one is my "primary" database? My biggest? The one with my highest paying customer? The one I spend the most time on? The one with the highest transaction rate? I have some large ones that are pretty static (holding tons of shapefiles imported to postgis), and smaller ones that are much more active. Unlike Oracle where their pricing model encourages you to squeeze as much as you can into one database, I imagine many organizations use many postgres databases. Maybe questions like "how many production postgres databases do you deal with", and maybe even "how many devel ones" would be interesting. Maybe even "what's the total size, total TPS, and total number of end users of the production databases".
Leif B. Kristensen wrote: > On Friday 26. June 2009, Josh Berkus wrote: >> For your primary database: >> >> 5)How big is the database in GigaBytes? (pick 1) > > From this question, I figure that users in the sub-Gigabyte range are > not really interesting. For my own part, I've got a primary database > of around 50 Megabytes, which is highly organized and mostly input by > hand. > I can see that they want to know how many "large" db's are in use. The real query is what options are there to choose from? <1GB or <.25GB and <.5GB ... My main question is why do they need this on the postgresql site when they can run it on their site and use this mailing list and maybe the postgresql site to get postgresql users there to fill it out? If it is on their site I see no issue with them asking about EDB. If it is on the postgresql site then it should be a postgresql questionnaire not an EDB questionnaire. Maybe the last question should be - Would you/do you use a commercially supported/enhanced version of postgresql? If so which one? -- Shane Ambler pgSQL (at) Sheeky (dot) Biz
All, So it sounds like, if we improve the questions and take the sales lead stuff out, the community is fine with advertising the survey on www.postgresql.org? -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. www.pgexperts.com
Hi Everyone
I have been giving a lot of thought to the wider question of relationships between businesses and the open source community. I hope I’m not covering old ground.
For the length of this offering, I apologise in advance; but hope it adds something to the discussion.
I’ve been doing some research on other open source projects – those that are were set up by commercial operations (like our once:radix) and those that are sponsored/heavily supported by commercial operations.
However you cut it, financial and physical support underpins the success of projects like PostgreSQL. And for most people in the community, it would be hypocrisy to deny that they are partly motivated by and derive their income from the commercial imperative.
If it is true that open source is about ‘free speech’ not ‘free beer’, my conclusion is that while there is no commercial interference in the decision-making processes and operational activities of the community, there is nothing wrong with giving value for money to the companies that support PostgreSQL. In fact, I believe it is in the interest of the community as a whole and the ongoing development and success of PostgreSQL that you do.
In the specific case of Enterprise DB, I understand that they provide invaluable support and contribute to the success of PostgreSQL. I strongly doubt that their management would EXPECT your support, but a QUID PRO QUO is certainly in order.
This sort of arrangement is common in commercial sponsorship today: It is no different to General Motors (Hmm, poor example) and Coca Cola sponsoring the Olympics and expecting to see their own products at venues. If a not-for-profit has only goodwill and exposure to offer in return for commercial support, they must be willing to deliver.
However there is, of course, a balancing argument. I was recently chatting to a MySQL specialist in Germany. He made the comment that MySQL AB has always been on the back foot with criticism of their commercial ties. I’ve not heard such comments in the case of my own business (once:technologies), but if we were a lot bigger, I expect we would.
All the altruism in the world won’t overcome people’s natural cynicism. I don’t know what the current mix of community and commercial backing is, but I imagine that most people have direct or indirect support from business.
After six years on the fringe of the PostgreSQL world, I remain convinced that it is the superior open source database. Whether it maintains that position will depend on a great many things. A key success factor is financial security and the confidence of businesses to choose it over MySQL and other offerings. Displaying a sensitivity to the commercial imperative is one aspect of raising that confidence.
I assume that no that policy guidelines exist for dealing with commercial support/relationships. If they do, why is this discussion necessary?
My personal view is that policy guidelines should be developed so businesses know what can and can’t be done. It would take a lot of the guesswork out of the process and could make backing PostgreSQL even more attractive to businesses.
I think, I should point out at this juncture, that my own experience with support from the PostgreSQL community has been extremely positive. But my needs are small. For a larger organisation, that might not be the case. Perhaps a survey of sponsors would be a useful exercise.
In my view: Help Enterprise DB. They have certainly earned your support and I don’t see any harm in what they are asking for.
On 30/6/09 8:11 AM, "Josh Berkus" <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
> All,
>
> So it sounds like, if we improve the questions and take the sales lead
> stuff out, the community is fine with advertising the survey on
> www.postgresql.org?
Regards
Rob Napier
I have been giving a lot of thought to the wider question of relationships between businesses and the open source community. I hope I’m not covering old ground.
For the length of this offering, I apologise in advance; but hope it adds something to the discussion.
I’ve been doing some research on other open source projects – those that are were set up by commercial operations (like our once:radix) and those that are sponsored/heavily supported by commercial operations.
However you cut it, financial and physical support underpins the success of projects like PostgreSQL. And for most people in the community, it would be hypocrisy to deny that they are partly motivated by and derive their income from the commercial imperative.
If it is true that open source is about ‘free speech’ not ‘free beer’, my conclusion is that while there is no commercial interference in the decision-making processes and operational activities of the community, there is nothing wrong with giving value for money to the companies that support PostgreSQL. In fact, I believe it is in the interest of the community as a whole and the ongoing development and success of PostgreSQL that you do.
In the specific case of Enterprise DB, I understand that they provide invaluable support and contribute to the success of PostgreSQL. I strongly doubt that their management would EXPECT your support, but a QUID PRO QUO is certainly in order.
This sort of arrangement is common in commercial sponsorship today: It is no different to General Motors (Hmm, poor example) and Coca Cola sponsoring the Olympics and expecting to see their own products at venues. If a not-for-profit has only goodwill and exposure to offer in return for commercial support, they must be willing to deliver.
However there is, of course, a balancing argument. I was recently chatting to a MySQL specialist in Germany. He made the comment that MySQL AB has always been on the back foot with criticism of their commercial ties. I’ve not heard such comments in the case of my own business (once:technologies), but if we were a lot bigger, I expect we would.
All the altruism in the world won’t overcome people’s natural cynicism. I don’t know what the current mix of community and commercial backing is, but I imagine that most people have direct or indirect support from business.
After six years on the fringe of the PostgreSQL world, I remain convinced that it is the superior open source database. Whether it maintains that position will depend on a great many things. A key success factor is financial security and the confidence of businesses to choose it over MySQL and other offerings. Displaying a sensitivity to the commercial imperative is one aspect of raising that confidence.
I assume that no that policy guidelines exist for dealing with commercial support/relationships. If they do, why is this discussion necessary?
My personal view is that policy guidelines should be developed so businesses know what can and can’t be done. It would take a lot of the guesswork out of the process and could make backing PostgreSQL even more attractive to businesses.
I think, I should point out at this juncture, that my own experience with support from the PostgreSQL community has been extremely positive. But my needs are small. For a larger organisation, that might not be the case. Perhaps a survey of sponsors would be a useful exercise.
In my view: Help Enterprise DB. They have certainly earned your support and I don’t see any harm in what they are asking for.
On 30/6/09 8:11 AM, "Josh Berkus" <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
> All,
>
> So it sounds like, if we improve the questions and take the sales lead
> stuff out, the community is fine with advertising the survey on
> www.postgresql.org?
Regards
Rob Napier
Rob Napier wrote: > In the specific case of Enterprise DB, I understand that they provide > invaluable support and contribute to the success of PostgreSQL. I strongly > doubt that their management would EXPECT your support, but a QUID PRO QUO is > certainly in order. > I think the real issue is that the survey as presented is directly aimed at their value added product not postgresql. There is a difference between us hosting their survey and us helping generating traffic to fill out their survey on their site. I do agree that we should all fill out this survey and get anyone we know that has an interest in postgresql to their site to also fill out the survey. Promoting it on our site is fine to me and I would expect it to be a free ad for them in return for them sharing the results. If the survey is hosted on our site then it should list all commercial versions asking which you have heard of and which you may choose over the plain wrap postgresql and why. As well as which companies would you turn to for postgresql support. This would then benefit the postgresql community as a whole instead of promoting one variation. -- Shane Ambler pgSQL (at) Sheeky (dot) Biz
On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 10:12 +1000, Rob Napier wrote: > Hi Everyone > In the specific case of Enterprise DB, I understand that they provide > invaluable support and contribute to the success of PostgreSQL. I > strongly doubt that their management would EXPECT your support, but a > QUID PRO QUO is certainly in order. > I disagree. With respect to EnterpriseDB and all other commercial contributors. "We" the community have provided them far more than they have ever provided us. EnterpriseDB as it exists today wouldn't in fact exist at all if it weren't for the many millions of dollars worth of code they received (and continue to receive) with "zero" investment. The same goes for Command Prompt. Yes EnterpriseDB provides a great deal of support to the community but do not be fooled. They do so purely at the behest of a potential commercial gain. (Note: I am talking about the corporation itself not the community contributors therein) I do believe it is in the communities interest to have a good relationship with commercial supporters. However the idea that we need a QUID PRO QUO system I believe is flawed. I would argue that PostgreSQL.Org has become entirely too public with its commercial ties and in affect has lost a lot of its community feel. Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake@jabber.postgresql.org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997
On 6/30/09 10:34 AM, Gavin M. Roy wrote: > I believe if we were to do a survey on the main site or linked to via > the site, it should be general, the results public, and it should have > no commercial influence - from EDB or otherwise. Define "commercial influence". I'm not sure what you're saying is OK and not OK. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. www.pgexperts.com
On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 11:27 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 6/30/09 10:34 AM, Gavin M. Roy wrote: > > I believe if we were to do a survey on the main site or linked to via > > the site, it should be general, the results public, and it should have > > no commercial influence - from EDB or otherwise. > > Define "commercial influence". I'm not sure what you're saying is OK > and not OK. Yeah I am not sure what he means here either. Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake@jabber.postgresql.org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997
On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 15:11 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > So it sounds like, if we improve the questions and take the sales lead > stuff out, the community is fine with advertising the survey on > www.postgresql.org? What is special about this one company doing the survey? AFAICS, nothing, it's just another way to do marketing. I'm told that's fair game these days though. What I'm more concerned about is why PostgreSQL isn't discussing doing this itself. We (PostgreSL project) should be sending out an email one month after release of 8.4 to elicit structured feedback. This should be an integral part of the release process. The questions mentioned on sample are mostly sales related questions. We should be asking about a whole range of things that matter to PostgreSQL adoption, e.g. Did you find the installer easy to use? Did you continue to use PostgreSQL after the initial evaluation? then either What were the reasons why you chose to adopt PostgreSQL? or What were the reasons why you chose *not* to adopt PostgreSQL. etc - not just, how much money have you got and how much of it are you willing to give to me? We should compile list of questions, code up as SGML, allow time to translate questions into all of our supported languages by our translation team and then release survey when it is done. We can consider the survey to be part of the docs for each release. We can publish the anonymised dataset for people to analyze and discuss. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
On 6/30/09 8:52 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 15:11 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > >> So it sounds like, if we improve the questions and take the sales lead >> stuff out, the community is fine with advertising the survey on >> www.postgresql.org? > > What is special about this one company doing the survey? AFAICS, > nothing, it's just another way to do marketing. I'm told that's fair > game these days though. What I'm more concerned about is why PostgreSQL > isn't discussing doing this itself. Mainly that they're doing the work to get the survey up. > We (PostgreSL project) should be sending out an email one month after > release of 8.4 to elicit structured feedback. This should be an integral > part of the release process. I completely agree. Volunteers? -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. www.pgexperts.com
I believe if we were to do a survey on the main site or linked to via the site, it should be general, the results public, and it should have no commercial influence - from EDB or otherwise.
Regards,
Gavin
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 8:52 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
All,
EnterpriseDB would like to do a survey of PostgreSQL users, at least the ones they can reach through postgresql.org. The results of the survey, anonymized, will be published under an OSS license for our use.
Under these circumstances, is it OK for EnterpriseDB to use pgsql-announce, pgsql-general and/or postgresql.org News to advertise the survey and solicit users for it? My personal thought is "yes". Yours?
List of questions below my signature; suggestions on better questions welcome!
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
www.pgexperts.com
Questions:
1)Ho w long have you been using PostgreSQL? (pick 1)
2)What do you use PostgreSQL for? (pick n)
3)What other databases do you use in the above capacity? (pick n)
4)What size is your organization in terms of revenue? (pick 1)
=====
For your primary database:
5)How big is the database in GigaBytes? (pick 1)
6)How many end users are supported? (pick 1)
7)How many transactions per day? (pick 1)
8)What hardware platform is it deployed on? (pick 1)
9)What software platform is it deployed on? (pick 1)
10)Do you purchase Subscription Support for PostgreSQL or are you community/self supported? (pick 1)
11)What is your favorite source of PostgreSQL information and help?
12)What types of applications is the database used for? (pick n)
===== End of Primary Database questions
13)What new / improved database engine features would you like to see in PostgreSQL? (freeform)
……….
14)What database administration tools/features would you like to see new or improved in PostgreSQL? (pick n)
What database monitoring tools/features would you like to see new or improved in PostgreSQL? (pick n)
What new / improved application development features / tools would you like to see in PostgreSQL? (pick n)
15)I would use Postgres Plus Standard Server if: (freeform)
16)I would use Postgres Plus Advanced Server if: (freeform)
17)Would you like to be contacted and provide us more detailed responses?
--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list (pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 11:59 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 6/30/09 8:52 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > > On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 15:11 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > > > >> So it sounds like, if we improve the questions and take the sales lead > >> stuff out, the community is fine with advertising the survey on > >> www.postgresql.org? > > > > What is special about this one company doing the survey? AFAICS, > > nothing, it's just another way to do marketing. I'm told that's fair > > game these days though. What I'm more concerned about is why PostgreSQL > > isn't discussing doing this itself. > > Mainly that they're doing the work to get the survey up. If people want to contribute, that's fine. If they don't want to contribute we have to be careful about accepting help-with-strings. We may as well move towards an advertising driven model, if we believe this. > > We (PostgreSL project) should be sending out an email one month after > > release of 8.4 to elicit structured feedback. This should be an integral > > part of the release process. > > I completely agree. Volunteers? Happy to. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
Josh Berkus wrote: > On 6/30/09 8:52 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: >> We (PostgreSL project) should be sending out an email one month after >> release of 8.4 to elicit structured feedback. This should be an integral >> part of the release process. > > I completely agree. Volunteers? I am tied up for a couple weeks, but will have time right around OSCON to assist. I've had some experience with community surveys - for the Portland tech community, and for conferences. Also, I know at least one person interested in analysis of this type of data, and how to structure the multiple choice questions and fill-in-the-blank ones to elicit things we might not expect. Sorry I can't jump on it immediately, but this is an area of interest for me and I'd like to help. -selena -- Me - http://www.chesnok.com/daily http://www.opensourcebridge.org
This basically mirrors my sentiment. If we do surveys, it should be about PostgreSQL improvement and feedback, not as a pre-sales lead generation tool.
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 11:52 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 15:11 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> So it sounds like, if we improve the questions and take the sales lead
> stuff out, the community is fine with advertising the survey on
> www.postgresql.org?
What is special about this one company doing the survey? AFAICS,
nothing, it's just another way to do marketing. I'm told that's fair
game these days though. What I'm more concerned about is why PostgreSQL
isn't discussing doing this itself.
We (PostgreSL project) should be sending out an email one month after
release of 8.4 to elicit structured feedback. This should be an integral
part of the release process.
The questions mentioned on sample are mostly sales related questions. We
should be asking about a whole range of things that matter to PostgreSQL
adoption, e.g. Did you find the installer easy to use? Did you continue
to use PostgreSQL after the initial evaluation? then either What were
the reasons why you chose to adopt PostgreSQL? or What were the reasons
why you chose *not* to adopt PostgreSQL. etc - not just, how much money
have you got and how much of it are you willing to give to me?
We should compile list of questions, code up as SGML, allow time to
translate questions into all of our supported languages by our
translation team and then release survey when it is done. We can
consider the survey to be part of the docs for each release.
We can publish the anonymised dataset for people to analyze and discuss.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list (pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 15:11 -0400, Gavin M. Roy wrote: > This basically mirrors my sentiment. If we do surveys, it should be > about PostgreSQL improvement and feedback, not as a pre-sales lead > generation tool. I agree. Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake@jabber.postgresql.org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997
On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 20:14 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: > On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 11:59 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > > On 6/30/09 8:52 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > > > We (PostgreSL project) should be sending out an email one month after > > > release of 8.4 to elicit structured feedback. This should be an integral > > > part of the release process. > > > > I completely agree. Volunteers? > > Happy to. Here's proposed timetable: 1. Discuss questions on pgsql-advocacy, list edited on Wiki Questions final call on 17 July Questions finalised by 24 July in SGML 2. Discuss impact of survey response on pgsql-www list. Any required infrastructure changes, targeted in-place by 1 Aug 3. Questions sent to translators on 24 July Request responses by 31 July 4. When everything in place, send out survey to pgsql-announce. This may be anywhere from 1 Aug onwards, depending on how it goes. Let survey run for 2 months. pg_dump of survey responses published -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
I'm interested on this too... but 'vebeen having trouble with my time~... @cert people developed a community survey... what about preparing few questions?... using the cert one as a model... which was very interesting~ ... and introducing more questions about features, and so on... Selena Deckelmann escribió: > Josh Berkus wrote: >> On 6/30/09 8:52 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > >>> We (PostgreSL project) should be sending out an email one month after >>> release of 8.4 to elicit structured feedback. This should be an integral >>> part of the release process. >> I completely agree. Volunteers? > > I am tied up for a couple weeks, but will have time right around OSCON > to assist. > > I've had some experience with community surveys - for the Portland tech > community, and for conferences. Also, I know at least one person > interested in analysis of this type of data, and how to structure the > multiple choice questions and fill-in-the-blank ones to elicit things we > might not expect. > > Sorry I can't jump on it immediately, but this is an area of interest > for me and I'd like to help. > > -selena >
All, Now, we'd *like* a community survey to replace the EDB Survey, and can maybe have one by August. Does anyone have any objections to posting the EDB survey to News etc. for July? I'd like to have something up when 8.4 is releases, just because we'll have more traffic. Before you answer the above, the sales-lead questions have been removed. The current question about value-add versions of PostgreSQL is completely generic, and there's no "may someone contact you". I've also fixed some of the other questions so that their information is more useful. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. www.pgexperts.com
Josh Berkus wrote: > All, > > Now, we'd *like* a community survey to replace the EDB Survey, and can > maybe have one by August. > > Does anyone have any objections to posting the EDB survey to News etc. > for July? I'd like to have something up when 8.4 is releases, just > because we'll have more traffic. > > Before you answer the above, the sales-lead questions have been removed. > The current question about value-add versions of PostgreSQL is > completely generic, and there's no "may someone contact you". I've also > fixed some of the other questions so that their information is more useful. Sounds reasonable to me Joe
On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 13:35 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > Now, we'd *like* a community survey to replace the EDB Survey, and can > maybe have one by August. > > Does anyone have any objections to posting the EDB survey to News etc. > for July? I'd like to have something up when 8.4 is releases, just > because we'll have more traffic. I think you already received an answer to that question from multiple people. Asking for objections twice before they are accepted seems wrong, as would asking three or more times also. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 22:06 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: > On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 13:35 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > > > Now, we'd *like* a community survey to replace the EDB Survey, and can > > maybe have one by August. > > > > Does anyone have any objections to posting the EDB survey to News etc. > > for July? I'd like to have something up when 8.4 is releases, just > > because we'll have more traffic. > > I think you already received an answer to that question from multiple > people. Asking for objections twice before they are accepted seems > wrong, as would asking three or more times also. I have been thinking about this thread quite a bit and I have come to the conclusion that I don't like the idea of an EDB survey being announced and publicized through .Org. It isn't news, it isn't an event, it is not an announcement of a new Postgresql derived product. It is purely a way to drive eyes to EDB and away from PostgreSQL. Remember that in business *all* public communications are marketing. This survey only benefits PostgreSQL in that it benefits EDB. Now there is nothing wrong with that as long as the resources being used are EDBs, not PostgreSQL's. -1 From me. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake@jabber.postgresql.org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997
JD, > I have been thinking about this thread quite a bit and I have come to > the conclusion that I don't like the idea of an EDB survey being > announced and publicized through .Org. It isn't news, it isn't an event, > it is not an announcement of a new Postgresql derived product. It is > purely a way to drive eyes to EDB and away from PostgreSQL. How? It'll be run on an independant survey site, and we'll get the results. > Remember that in business *all* public communications are marketing. > This survey only benefits PostgreSQL in that it benefits EDB. *I'd* like to have the data. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. www.pgexperts.com
On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 14:59 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > JD, > > > I have been thinking about this thread quite a bit and I have come to > > the conclusion that I don't like the idea of an EDB survey being > > announced and publicized through .Org. It isn't news, it isn't an event, > > it is not an announcement of a new Postgresql derived product. It is > > purely a way to drive eyes to EDB and away from PostgreSQL. > > How? It'll be run on an independant survey site, and we'll get the results. I missed that part. That does change things a bit. If this is going to be hosted independently but "sponsored by EDB for Postgresql.org" then I remove my objection. > > Remember that in business *all* public communications are marketing. > > This survey only benefits PostgreSQL in that it benefits EDB. > > *I'd* like to have the data. We could have a survey up on pugs in 30 minutes. Joshua D. Drake > -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake@jabber.postgresql.org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997
On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 15:08 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > > Remember that in business *all* public communications are marketing. > > > This survey only benefits PostgreSQL in that it benefits EDB. > > > > *I'd* like to have the data. > > We could have a survey up on pugs in 30 minutes. > Or .US for that matter. Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake@jabber.postgresql.org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997
Josh,
>> We could have a survey up on pugs in 30 minutes.
>>
>
> Or .US for that matter.
Yeah, don't have much time to test though.
EDB has an account with SurveyMethods, which should be able to scale to
as many people want to take it.
The new set of questions and options is below my Sig. I think you'll
find that the "EDB Content" is gone. There's a few question fixes still
pending, but this is largely what it'll be.
My thought was, just put it up in News, and I may put a link in my blog
since I've worked on it some.
Simon isn't OK with it even so ... others?
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
www.pgexperts.com
1.
How long have you been using PostgreSQL?
Less than 1 year
1 to 2 years
2 to 5 years
5 years or more
*2.
What do you use PostgreSQL for?
Personal
Business – Internal applications and operations
Business – in products which we sell
Government
Non-Profit / NGO
Education
If other, please specify
3.
If you answered either ‘Business’ above, what kind of business is your
company in (select all that apply) ?
Producing Software
Commercial Website or Web Infrastructure
IT Consulting or Services
Non-IT Consulting or Services
Retail
Manufacturing
If other, please specify
*4.
What other databases do you use in the above capacity (select all that
apply)?
DB/2
Sybase
Informix
MySQL
Ingres
None
Oracle
SQL Server
If other, please specify
*5.
What size is your organization in terms of revenue?
Non-profit or Government
Less than $250K
$250K to 1M
1 to $10M
10 to $100M
$100M or more
What size is your organization in terms of people?
Less than 10
11 to 100
101 to 1000
1000 or more
*7.
How large is your primary database (the database most closely tied to
your organization's operations or business)? If you have a clustered
database, or have partitioned your database across multiple servers,
please estimate total size.
Less than 1GB
1 to 10GB
11 to 100GB
100GB to 1TB
1 to 10 TB
10 TB or more
*8.
On how many servers are you running PostgreSQL supporting production
applications?
None
1
2 to 4
5 to 10
11 to 50
51 or more
*9.
How many application end users does the primary database support?
Less than 100
100 to 1000
1000 to 10K
10K to 100K
100K or more
*10.
How many transactions does the primary database process per day?
Less than 1000
1K to 10K
10 to 100K
100K to 1M
1 to 10M
10M or more
Which vendor manufactured your database server hardware (check all that
apply)?
HP
Dell
IBM
MAC
Sun
Rackable
Self-built (whitebox) servers
Hosted in 3rd-party Data Center or Cloud
If other, please specify
*12.
On what operating system does your primary database run?
Windows
Apple OSX
Solaris
AIX
FreeBSD
HP-UX
Linux
Windows
MAC
Solaris
AIX
Linux
If other, please specify
*13.
What type of applications is the primary database used for?
OLTP or e-Commerce
Web Content Management / Collaboration / Social Network
Business Intelligence / Data Warehousing / Information Publishing
Web Services / Supply Chain Automation / Business Integration
Geographic Applications and Services
*14.
Of the following PostgreSQL feature and tool categories, please pick the
two where new features, tools, and further development would matter the
most to your organization.
Large database features (partitioning, parallel query, etc.)
Horizontal Scalability (master-slave replication, async clustering)
High Availability (hot standby, failover, load balancing)
Administrative Tools (management tools, backup, monitoring)
OLTP Performance (tranactions per second)
Modules and deployment management (contrib, disk images, installers,
3rd-party modules)
Security (encrypted database, SEPostgres, Role-based management)
Advanced Features (SQL/MED, XML, special data types)
Geographic Database (PostGIS)
*15.
Do you, or would you, use a paid-licenses enhanced version of
PostgreSQL, such as Postgres Plus Advanced Server, Mammoth PostgreSQL,
Truviso, or Fujitsu Supported PostgreSQL?
No, we only use pure open source PostgreSQL.
Yes, if it offered compelling enough features.
Yes, we're currently evaluating one.
Yes, we already use one.
If you answered any "yes" option in Question 15 above, please check the
products which you use or are evaluating:
Postgres Plus Advanced Server
Fujitsu Supported PostgreSQL
Truviso
Mammoth PostgreSQL
Greenplum
Aster Data
Paraccel
If other, please specify
17.
If you answered any "yes" option in Question 16 above, please choose
your primary reason for using this enhanced version of PostgreSQL?
Features mainstream PostgreSQL doesn't have, like streaming or clustering.
Packaging, integration and deployment
Support and Quality assurance.
Included Management Tools
General Performance
If other, please specify
On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 15:18 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > Simon isn't OK with it even so ... others? Just keep re-asking until you hear no objections. That will make it fair. Make it seem as if there is the only one person with an objection, when others have already agreed. How about a 5 day break while you do a recount? Seems like a proven technique. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
> Just keep re-asking until you hear no objections. That will make it > fair. Make it seem as if there is the only one person with an objection, > when others have already agreed. Dude, other people objected on specific counts. That is, there were specific things they objected to, rather than the whole idea. Then, just like code, we do a "here it is with that specific thing fixed. Is it OK now?" I've got that *you* don't like the whole idea. I don't have that definitely from *anyone* else (except maybe Gavin, and I'm still not clear on what his response means), and quite a few people said they liked the idea -- in fact, the majority who have spoken up on this list. That's why I'm iterating -- to make sure we've removed the specific objections of most of the people on this list. I may not get to ignore you, but you don't get sole veto power either. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. www.pgexperts.com
On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 15:37 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > That's why I'm iterating -- to make sure we've removed the specific > objections of most of the people on this list. > > I may not get to ignore you, but you don't get sole veto power either. Easy guys. Simon with respect you are just going to have to chill a bit. The reality is, most people are for this. Even my objections are a bit hard pressed to be not over ridden because Josh is being thorough and fair in his assertions. Frankly my only objection at this point is that I can have a survey up tonight on .US if we wanted to go that route. I also agree that the information would be useful as a whole. Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake@jabber.postgresql.org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997
Josh, > Frankly my only objection at this point is that I can have a survey up > tonight on .US if we wanted to go that route. I also agree that the > information would be useful as a whole. If you can make it work, the EDB guys don't care *where* the survey is hosted. They just want the data. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. www.pgexperts.com
On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 15:37 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > > Just keep re-asking until you hear no objections. That will make it > > fair. Make it seem as if there is the only one person with an objection, > > when others have already agreed. > > Dude, other people objected on specific counts. That is, there were > specific things they objected to, rather than the whole idea. Then, > just like code, we do a "here it is with that specific thing fixed. Is > it OK now?" > > I've got that *you* don't like the whole idea. I don't have that > definitely from *anyone* else (except maybe Gavin, and I'm still not > clear on what his response means), and quite a few people said they > liked the idea -- in fact, the majority who have spoken up on this list. From your response, I think you'll just keep trying to isolate my opinion until it seems frantic and somehow strange. Calling me dude, or asking me to chill, is a well-known gambit to make my views seem emotional, rather than rational. What's the rush? Why so quick to silence me? I haven't objected to "the whole idea". Surveys are good, and I've proposed a plan to deliver one, that has clear backing. What is so important about this that it should be railroaded through at the last minute? What was wrong with a community project? I've explained a reason why we should wait a month; you've not explained why haste is important. I've also explained how we can get multi-language results. If we are interested in polling new PostgreSQL users, lets wait awhile to let some join. If we are only interested in existing users, why do it now, at release time? Haste now makes no sense. Let's take time, do it right and do it for, and by, the PostgreSQL community. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 00:24 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: > >From your response, I think you'll just keep trying to isolate my > opinion until it seems frantic and somehow strange. Calling me dude, or > asking me to chill, is a well-known gambit to make my views seem > emotional, rather than rational. What's the rush? Why so quick to > silence me? Why so paranoid? 8.4 is releasing very soon. We want the survey up before that. It is completely legitimate. Either way, the point is moot. The survey is done. I am sure that Josh will publish it when he is ready. Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake@jabber.postgresql.org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997
> I haven't objected to "the whole idea". Surveys are good, and I've > proposed a plan to deliver one, that has clear backing. Yes, and I believe that the survey you propose, when it's delivered, will be superior to this one. The fact that we're going to do a better survey 1 or 2 months from now is no reason not to do an OK survey now. It's not like we're limited to doing 1 survey per year for some reason. > What is so important about this that it should be railroaded through at > the last minute? What was wrong with a community project? I've explained > a reason why we should wait a month; you've not explained why haste is > important. During the next 2 weeks, PostgreSQL.org will have more traffic than it will for the rest of the year. This gives us an opportunity to hear from *more* users than we will a month from now. However, to allieviate some of your concerns, JD has duplicated the survey on postgresql.us so that we can have the survey on a site we control. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. www.pgexperts.com
On 6/30/09 4:24 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: > Calling me dude, or > asking me to chill, is a well-known gambit to make my views seem > emotional, rather than rational. Actually, since I'm from California, saying "Dude" is my way of *getting* emotional. I know it means something different in Britain. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. www.pgexperts.com
On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 17:02 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > > I haven't objected to "the whole idea". Surveys are good, and I've > > proposed a plan to deliver one, that has clear backing. > > Yes, and I believe that the survey you propose, when it's delivered, > will be superior to this one. The fact that we're going to do a better > survey 1 or 2 months from now is no reason not to do an OK survey now. > > It's not like we're limited to doing 1 survey per year for some reason. > > > What is so important about this that it should be railroaded through at > > the last minute? What was wrong with a community project? I've explained > > a reason why we should wait a month; you've not explained why haste is > > important. > > During the next 2 weeks, PostgreSQL.org will have more traffic than it > will for the rest of the year. This gives us an opportunity to hear > from *more* users than we will a month from now. The discussion was about whether it was OK to send out things via pgsql-announce, which will have more people, not less people in one month's time. Multiple surveys would be strange to say the least. The questions on the current survey have obviously not been well considered, though some of those questions are useful. I'm disappointed that you asked for opinions and then when you didn't like them, asked for them again. As expected, not all people that spoke the first time spoke again. The subsequent name calling is a great way to have nobody else join the debate on either side. Who would wish to be seen as unreasonable? As Rob says, if you don't have clear standards about what is and is not acceptable then it will, possibly has, eroded away to nothing. Nobody has the time for strong and lengthy debates on minor points. But where do we draw the line? We just continually step backwards in small enough steps that no single step is worthy of debate. > However, to allieviate some of your concerns, JD has duplicated the > survey on postgresql.us so that we can have the survey on a site we control. Yes, I think the reason for JD's change of heart is clear. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
Simon, > The discussion was about whether it was OK to send out things via > pgsql-announce, which will have more people, not less people in one > month's time. Yes, I'm thinking this survey low-key, just News and a link in place of community/survey at this time. That way we capture some of the increased website traffic, but save the real survey blitz for when we have a more complete survey we can use several times. This one is a one-off. Then when we get the full, complete community survey done we can blast it through the various e-mail channels and elsewhere. I do think getting it done by August 1 is ambitious though, especially if we're talking about a July 15 CommitFest. > Multiple surveys would be strange to say the least. The > questions on the current survey have obviously not been well considered, > though some of those questions are useful. We'll learn some stuff by seeing what we collect off this survey and how people respond to it which will improve future surveys. Release early, release often, you know? > I'm disappointed that you asked for opinions and then when you didn't > like them, asked for them again. How many times do I need to repeat this? I got several people who approved, and several specific objections to specific things in the survey. I changed the survey to address those objections, and asked if there were still problems. *just* like I would with a piece of code. > The subsequent name calling is a great way > to have nobody else join the debate on either side. What name calling? > As Rob says, if you don't have clear standards about what is and is not > acceptable then it will, possibly has, eroded away to nothing. Nobody > has the time for strong and lengthy debates on minor points. But where > do we draw the line? We just continually step backwards in small enough > steps that no single step is worthy of debate. When did doing a survey become a moral point? It's a survey. Don't make it more than it is. >> However, to allieviate some of your concerns, JD has duplicated the >> survey on postgresql.us so that we can have the survey on a site we control. > > Yes, I think the reason for JD's change of heart is clear. So where the survey is hosted is not a consideration for you? If that's the case, I'd just as happily use SurveyMethods. They have a nice console. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. www.pgexperts.com
Excuse me for showing my noose again where noone called me: Josh Berkus escribió: > Simon, > >> The discussion was about whether it was OK to send out things via >> pgsql-announce, which will have more people, not less people in one >> month's time. > > Yes, I'm thinking this survey low-key, just News and a link in place of > community/survey at this time. That way we capture some of the increased > website traffic, but save the real survey blitz for when we have a more > complete survey we can use several times. This one is a one-off. > > Then when we get the full, complete community survey done we can blast > it through the various e-mail channels and elsewhere. I do think > getting it done by August 1 is ambitious though, especially if we're > talking about a July 15 CommitFest. > >> Multiple surveys would be strange to say the least. The >> questions on the current survey have obviously not been well considered, >> though some of those questions are useful. The whole idea is great... having one for the release, even if it a 5 question survey... it will give great data to analyze... and to play with... on the other hand... having a second one... *after* the release (say about one month), would give *us* the chance to tune up the 2nd survey, based on the behavior of the first one... > We'll learn some stuff by seeing what we collect off this survey and how > people respond to it which will improve future surveys. Release early, > release often, you know? My point. >> I'm disappointed that you asked for opinions and then when you didn't >> like them, asked for them again. > > How many times do I need to repeat this? I got several people who > approved, and several specific objections to specific things in the > survey. I changed the survey to address those objections, and asked if > there were still problems. *just* like I would with a piece of code. > >> The subsequent name calling is a great way >> to have nobody else join the debate on either side. > > What name calling? I join the question... >> As Rob says, if you don't have clear standards about what is and is not >> acceptable then it will, possibly has, eroded away to nothing. Nobody >> has the time for strong and lengthy debates on minor points. But where >> do we draw the line? We just continually step backwards in small enough >> steps that no single step is worthy of debate. Not when debates looks pointless (Personal opinion)... if i'm not lost on the olap's hyper (cubic) space... the last part of this debate, is all about the *¿rush?* of having a survey as soon as the 8.4 release comes out, right?... from what i see, and IME, sometimes is better to have a small sample, and develop something bigger... by doing some tuning based on the content/results/information that sample dropped... (If you want to get useful information off a target... you *have* to experiment a little bit... and i belive... this is the moment for that...) > When did doing a survey become a moral point? It's a survey. Don't > make it more than it is. > >>> However, to allieviate some of your concerns, JD has duplicated the >>> survey on postgresql.us so that we can have the survey on a site we >>> control. >> >> Yes, I think the reason for JD's change of heart is clear. > > So where the survey is hosted is not a consideration for you? If that's > the case, I'd just as happily use SurveyMethods. They have a nice console. >
On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 00:55 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > > I'm disappointed that you asked for opinions and then when you didn't > > like them, asked for them again. > > How many times do I need to repeat this? I got several people who > approved, and several specific objections to specific things in the > survey. I changed the survey to address those objections, and asked if > there were still problems. *just* like I would with a piece of code. You asked for an opinion, received negative counter opinions. I proposed an alternative and received positive support. You haven't changed things in line with those posts. I have one specific objection only: we, the PostgreSQL project, should be doing this in the name of the project, not let another do it. I believe that others agreed with that. > > The subsequent name calling is a great way > > to have nobody else join the debate on either side. > > What name calling? > > As Rob says, if you don't have clear standards about what is and is not > > acceptable then it will, possibly has, eroded away to nothing. Nobody > > has the time for strong and lengthy debates on minor points. But where > > do we draw the line? We just continually step backwards in small enough > > steps that no single step is worthy of debate. > > When did doing a survey become a moral point? It's a survey. Don't > make it more than it is. This is just verbal dancing. The survey would never be a moral point. The point of the discussion was about community standards with regard to marketing. It's not a question of morals and I do not claim to be authority on morality. What are our standards? Do we have any? Would we stick to them if we had any? -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
Simon Riggs escribió: > On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 00:55 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > >>> I'm disappointed that you asked for opinions and then when you didn't >>> like them, asked for them again. >> How many times do I need to repeat this? I got several people who >> approved, and several specific objections to specific things in the >> survey. I changed the survey to address those objections, and asked if >> there were still problems. *just* like I would with a piece of code. > > You asked for an opinion, received negative counter opinions. I proposed > an alternative and received positive support. You haven't changed things > in line with those posts. > > I have one specific objection only: we, the PostgreSQL project, should > be doing this in the name of the project, not let another do it. I > believe that others agreed with that. If this is the case, i dont see the problem... in fact... many are up for it.. and yes... *we* as community should be doing this... but ATM, noone is... and dont take me bad... but... if Edb and/or Josh, or anyone else came with this idea... we would not been having this conversation... dont you think?. I keep with my opinion... We should go with this survey... and take as much advantage as we can, to have our own community survey... http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-advocacy/2009-06/msg00084.php >>> The subsequent name calling is a great way >>> to have nobody else join the debate on either side. >> What name calling? > >>> As Rob says, if you don't have clear standards about what is and is not >>> acceptable then it will, possibly has, eroded away to nothing. Nobody >>> has the time for strong and lengthy debates on minor points. But where >>> do we draw the line? We just continually step backwards in small enough >>> steps that no single step is worthy of debate. >> When did doing a survey become a moral point? It's a survey. Don't >> make it more than it is. > > This is just verbal dancing. The survey would never be a moral point. > The point of the discussion was about community standards with regard to > marketing. It's not a question of morals and I do not claim to be > authority on morality. > > What are our standards? Do we have any? Would we stick to them if we had > any? > We should have... if we dont.
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 14:59 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: >> JD, >> >>> I have been thinking about this thread quite a bit and I have come to >>> the conclusion that I don't like the idea of an EDB survey being >>> announced and publicized through .Org. It isn't news, it isn't an event, >>> it is not an announcement of a new Postgresql derived product. It is >>> purely a way to drive eyes to EDB and away from PostgreSQL. >> How? It'll be run on an independant survey site, and we'll get the results. > > I missed that part. That does change things a bit. If this is going to > be hosted independently but "sponsored by EDB for Postgresql.org" then I > remove my objection. > Me too. Looking back I see that it was only asked to promote the survey on our site and mailing lists, but most of us seemed to assume it was to host the survey on our site. No objections to only promoting their survey. -- Shane Ambler pgSQL (at) Sheeky (dot) Biz
Josh Berkus wrote: > However, to allieviate some of your concerns, JD has duplicated the > survey on postgresql.us so that we can have the survey on a site we > control. > I don't think it would be a good idea to have the same survey on two sites. People will just get confused about whether to fill out one or both or which one is preferable. -- Shane Ambler pgSQL (at) Sheeky (dot) Biz
On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 00:55 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > Yes, I'm thinking this survey low-key, just News and a link in place of > community/survey at this time. That way we capture some of the increased > website traffic, but save the real survey blitz for when we have a more > complete survey we can use several times. This one is a one-off. I continue to have reservations, but since I'm involved in a company as well, any objection I have to certain kinds of marketing is likely to be seen as partisan or biased. Specifically, I want to show that I have nothing against EnterpriseDB and the best way to show that is to step aside. I remove any objection to the user survey going ahead now. > Then when we get the full, complete community survey done we can blast > it through the various e-mail channels and elsewhere. I do think > getting it done by August 1 is ambitious though, especially if we're > talking about a July 15 CommitFest. The project needs a survey that is comprehensive, detailed, regular and global, run by and for the community. I think we should start that on a positive note, so again reason to withdraw. Dates are flexible but we need input into the 8.5 dev process. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
Simon, > The project needs a survey that is comprehensive, detailed, regular and > global, run by and for the community. I think we should start that on a > positive note, so again reason to withdraw. Dates are flexible but we > need input into the 8.5 dev process. If you're enthusiastic about making a survey, there's no reason for you to withdraw. For that matter, there's no reason why Gary at EDB can't contribute to the better survey along with everyone else. Amusing note: despite *us* never having a "user survey", the OpenOffice.org user survey which they ran for years and collected over 200,000 responses was built by folks from the PostgreSQL project (me, Justin, Roberto). -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. www.pgexperts.com
Simon Riggs wrote: > > On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 15:37 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > > > Just keep re-asking until you hear no objections. That will make it > > > fair. Make it seem as if there is the only one person with an objection, > > > when others have already agreed. > > > > Dude, other people objected on specific counts. That is, there were > > specific things they objected to, rather than the whole idea. Then, > > just like code, we do a "here it is with that specific thing fixed. Is > > it OK now?" > > > > I've got that *you* don't like the whole idea. I don't have that > > definitely from *anyone* else (except maybe Gavin, and I'm still not > > clear on what his response means), and quite a few people said they > > liked the idea -- in fact, the majority who have spoken up on this list. > > >From your response, I think you'll just keep trying to isolate my > opinion until it seems frantic and somehow strange. Calling me dude, or > asking me to chill, is a well-known gambit to make my views seem > emotional, rather than rational. What's the rush? Why so quick to > silence me? The fact I could have predicted this reaction from Simon says something too. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
> Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 00:27:56 +0930 > From: Shane Ambler <pgsql@Sheeky.Biz> > To: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> > Cc: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>, > "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>, > "Leif B. Kristensen" <leif@solumslekt.org>, > pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: Joint user survey with EnterpriseDB? > Message-ID: <4A4B7974.30802@Sheeky.Biz> > > I don't think it would be a good idea to have the same survey on two > sites. People will just get confused about whether to fill out one or > both or which one is preferable. I agree. Unless there is some method by which data will be aggregated (in which case, you need to make allowances for those who answered both surveys), having two is not ideal. gabrielle
On Wednesday 01 July 2009 03:55:32 Josh Berkus wrote: > Yes, I'm thinking this survey low-key, just News and a link in place of > community/survey at this time. That way we capture some of the increased > website traffic, but save the real survey blitz for when we have a more > complete survey we can use several times. This one is a one-off. > > Then when we get the full, complete community survey done we can blast > it through the various e-mail channels and elsewhere. I do think > getting it done by August 1 is ambitious though, especially if we're > talking about a July 15 CommitFest. > Most people don't like marketing surveys, the type of people inclined to use FLOSS software tend to like them even less than comercial customers. Sending out two marketing surveys within ~ 1 month of each seems like the worst choice of all; I surely hope we wouldn't do that. BTW, I see downthread Simon has bailed on the idea of doing a community survey for 8.4, so perhaps there's no cause for concern, but before we take any action on either survey, I thought it was important that this point be raised. -- Robert Treat Conjecture: http://www.xzilla.net Consulting: http://www.omniti.com
On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 21:27 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Simon Riggs wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 15:37 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > > > > Just keep re-asking until you hear no objections. That will make it > > > > fair. Make it seem as if there is the only one person with an objection, > > > > when others have already agreed. > > > > > > Dude, other people objected on specific counts. That is, there were > > > specific things they objected to, rather than the whole idea. Then, > > > just like code, we do a "here it is with that specific thing fixed. Is > > > it OK now?" > > > > > > I've got that *you* don't like the whole idea. I don't have that > > > definitely from *anyone* else (except maybe Gavin, and I'm still not > > > clear on what his response means), and quite a few people said they > > > liked the idea -- in fact, the majority who have spoken up on this list. > > > > >From your response, I think you'll just keep trying to isolate my > > opinion until it seems frantic and somehow strange. Calling me dude, or > > asking me to chill, is a well-known gambit to make my views seem > > emotional, rather than rational. What's the rush? Why so quick to > > silence me? > > The fact I could have predicted this reaction from Simon says something > too. My stance on such marketing issues is well known. Many volunteer/charity organisations manage to operate without heavy marketing-related branding and I think it is a shame we cannot have reasonable restrictions on that also. e.g. Oxfam, Boy Scouts, Churches. These restrictions are normal and natural in all of the community organisations with which I have been associated, admittedly all of which are UK based. I see it as a sensible separation that allows people to work together more easily, not as part of a moral crusade, which I personally would not claim to lead. I'm sure many actions and reactions are predictable for both of us. I don't have a problem with being consistent in my views and values, or speaking out in favour or defence of them. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 23:54 -0400, Robert Treat wrote: > BTW, I see downthread Simon has bailed on the idea of doing a community survey > for 8.4, so perhaps there's no cause for concern, but before we take any > action on either survey, I thought it was important that this point be > raised. Actually, it was not my intention to "bail", just to withdraw my objection to the survey Josh had outlined. Apologies if my words caused confusion. I have every intention of creating a community survey according to the plan proposed earlier. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 15:57 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > Simon, > > > The project needs a survey that is comprehensive, detailed, regular and > > global, run by and for the community. I think we should start that on a > > positive note, so again reason to withdraw. Dates are flexible but we > > need input into the 8.5 dev process. > > If you're enthusiastic about making a survey, there's no reason for you > to withdraw. Sorry, I meant "withdraw my objection to the immediate EDB survey" I think the survey is important and will continue. > For that matter, there's no reason why Gary at EDB can't > contribute to the better survey along with everyone else. > > Amusing note: despite *us* never having a "user survey", the > OpenOffice.org user survey which they ran for years and collected over > 200,000 responses was built by folks from the PostgreSQL project (me, > Justin, Roberto). Good example, and well done. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
Simon
This is where I have to disagree with you. And at the risk of sounding like a stuck record, a clear set of policy guidelines could avoid a lot of this.
PostgreSQL is not a church or charity. It is a group of individuals and organisations banded together in a common cause: To develop and promote software development that is based on an approach that is different from the commercial business model. But don't have any doubts that it still needs to play in the same pond and by many of the same rules as businesses.
And picking up on something that I think is essential to this thread: The community consists of individuals AND organisations. Enterprise DB is part of the community as is 2ndQuadrant and once:technologies.
For any business to succeed (including Oxfam) marketing and promotion is an essential part of the mix. As is also the case with open source projects. Every time we promote our businesses, we are also promoting PostgreSQL.
I WANT Enterprise DB to be successful, as I also want to see you and your business succeed; and every other business/individual who is associated with PostgreSQL. Because that is good for the project, the community and ultimately, my business.
You include the name of your company on your emails to this forum. That is self promotion. Who is the member of the community, you or your company? I am not clear on your objections to commercial ties but they seem to be inconsistent.
Please support the development of a Policy Guideline for corporate ties and let’s stop arguing about this topic. It is going nowhere. It’s counter-intuitive and it’s counter-productive.
Happy Fourth of July to those of you who celebrate it. What a great time to launch 8.4.
I aim to have the draft copy of the 8.4 brochure ready by the weekend for comment.
> My stance on such marketing issues is well known. Many volunteer/charity
> organisations manage to operate without heavy marketing-related branding
> and I think it is a shame we cannot have reasonable restrictions on that
> also. e.g. Oxfam, Boy Scouts, Churches. These restrictions are normal
> and natural in all of the community organisations with which I have been
> associated, admittedly all of which are UK based. I see it as a sensible
> separation that allows people to work together more easily, not as part
> of a moral crusade, which I personally would not claim to lead.
>
> I'm sure many actions and reactions are predictable for both of us. I
> don't have a problem with being consistent in my views and values, or
> speaking out in favour or defence of them.
Regards
Rob Napier
This is where I have to disagree with you. And at the risk of sounding like a stuck record, a clear set of policy guidelines could avoid a lot of this.
PostgreSQL is not a church or charity. It is a group of individuals and organisations banded together in a common cause: To develop and promote software development that is based on an approach that is different from the commercial business model. But don't have any doubts that it still needs to play in the same pond and by many of the same rules as businesses.
And picking up on something that I think is essential to this thread: The community consists of individuals AND organisations. Enterprise DB is part of the community as is 2ndQuadrant and once:technologies.
For any business to succeed (including Oxfam) marketing and promotion is an essential part of the mix. As is also the case with open source projects. Every time we promote our businesses, we are also promoting PostgreSQL.
I WANT Enterprise DB to be successful, as I also want to see you and your business succeed; and every other business/individual who is associated with PostgreSQL. Because that is good for the project, the community and ultimately, my business.
You include the name of your company on your emails to this forum. That is self promotion. Who is the member of the community, you or your company? I am not clear on your objections to commercial ties but they seem to be inconsistent.
Please support the development of a Policy Guideline for corporate ties and let’s stop arguing about this topic. It is going nowhere. It’s counter-intuitive and it’s counter-productive.
Happy Fourth of July to those of you who celebrate it. What a great time to launch 8.4.
I aim to have the draft copy of the 8.4 brochure ready by the weekend for comment.
> My stance on such marketing issues is well known. Many volunteer/charity
> organisations manage to operate without heavy marketing-related branding
> and I think it is a shame we cannot have reasonable restrictions on that
> also. e.g. Oxfam, Boy Scouts, Churches. These restrictions are normal
> and natural in all of the community organisations with which I have been
> associated, admittedly all of which are UK based. I see it as a sensible
> separation that allows people to work together more easily, not as part
> of a moral crusade, which I personally would not claim to lead.
>
> I'm sure many actions and reactions are predictable for both of us. I
> don't have a problem with being consistent in my views and values, or
> speaking out in favour or defence of them.
Regards
Rob Napier
On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Rob Napier<rob@doitonce.net.au> wrote: > Happy Fourth of July to those of you who celebrate it. What a great time to > launch 8.4. Surely we were more precise than that? How credible would database software be if it missed dates by three days? Obviously 8.4 was the Canada Day release. -- greg http://mit.edu/~gsstark/resume.pdf
On Thu, 2009-07-02 at 17:49 +1000, Rob Napier wrote: > You include the name of your company on your emails to this forum. > That is self promotion. Who is the member of the community, you or > your company? I am not clear on your objections to commercial ties but > they seem to be inconsistent. I'm not against marketing or competition, I am in favour of some guidelines so that people know what is acceptable and what is not. I would call this "a level playing field", perhaps the description doesn't travel well, I'm not sure. ISTM that the alternative is slowly escalating endemic marketing. You won't find me pushing the boundaries in marketing terms, but you will see me following where others have led, once it is clear it is acceptable to do so. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
Robert, > BTW, I see downthread Simon has bailed on the idea of doing a community survey > for 8.4, so perhaps there's no cause for concern, but before we take any > action on either survey, I thought it was important that this point be > raised. Yes. I know my schedule, though, and I know Selena's, and I have some idea of how Simon's unpaid time will be spent for the next month. Realistically, it's going to be *at least* a couple months until we have a community-developed really good survey out. But it also played into me not broadcasting *this* survey as much as we might have. I think only one big survey blitz per year. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. www.pgexperts.com