Re: The Yellow Brick Road

> I am extremely grateful to all those who have made PostgreSQL the
> wonderful program that it is.  In thanks, I feel like I'm pouring cold
> water on your head.
>
> I also mean no disrespect to Landmark.  The weather channel has
> lubricated many a conversation between me and my Grandmother.
>
> I wish only the best to the PostgreSQL team, and to Landmark and it's
> subsidiaries.
>
> But whatever you do, please don't upset the dynamic that made PostgreSQL
> what it is today.

About the only major contribution I can make here is to say that the
core team is very concerned about keeping things exactly the same.  Our
San Francisco meeting was primarily to explore those issues with
Landmark.  We want only the best for PostgreSQL.  We are doing our best
to make sure that the addition of Landmark only _helps_ PostgreSQL.
Landmark has the same goal, so we think this is attainable.

As far as GPL vs. BSD, we have already gone over that in the past.  As
an example, the nature of our code is that if a company develops a data
type and wants to distribute it to some customers, they are required to
freely distribute that data type to everyone, even if it took them
months to write it.  We generally feel that is too much of a burden, and
hampers use of PostgreSQL by companies that want to distribute versions
of PostgreSQL with such enhancements.  Now, we don't think Great Bridge
or any one else wants to do that, but we honor their right to do it.

As far as getting rich, well, that is no one's plan.  We do feel that
Great Bridge will allow some developers to spend more time on
PostgreSQL, and properly supervised, that is a good thing for the
project as a whole.

Someone already mentioned that if I get on Letterman with my PostgreSQL
book, he is going to be upset, so I guess I am going to have to mention
the major PostgreSQL developers if I ever get on the show.  Doesn't
leave much time to talk to Dave.  :-)

There is one other issue that seems obvious to me.  PostgreSQL really
doesn't have many options with any company wanting to commercially
support PostgreSQL.  We can be hostile, but that doesn't seem good.

I franky was afraid some IPO-spin company would come in, do a terrible
job supporting PostgreSQL, give us a bad name, and leave.  I am pleased
Landmark is the one wanting to do this, because I see them in for the
long haul (25M is a lot for a startup). I know they will do they best
job they can.  I have a book here that is their corporate guidebook,
"Built to Last", by Collins and Porras, and impressed by its contents.
Even the Landmark website has an interesting "Core Values" section:

    http://www.landmarkcom.com/culture/core.html

So, basically, yes, this is a challenge, and the best we can do is to
try to make it positive for PostgreSQL.  I believe this can be done.

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026