> On Aug 2, 2016, at 2:12 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 04:47:17PM +0200, Damien Clochard wrote:
>> Markus' article didn't make it to the HN front page heaven :
>> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12187797
>>
>> However there's another post linking directly to pgsql-hackers:
>> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12201353
>>
>> So now let's all talk here about some Hacker News comments relative to a
>> PostgreSQL mailing-list and get stuck in an infinite loop :)
>>
>> Joke aside, the HN comments really show that the key point is not about the
>> arguments we can object to Uber's article, but **how** we respond to it.
>>
>> some comments among others :
>>
>> « they're admitting there's a problem (which exists for this very specific
>> user case) and not just deflecting the criticism. I'm impressed, I'd say a
>> lot of projects couldn't have handled this so nicely »
>>
>> « I have a lot more respect for this than say MongoDb which claims to be
>> great at everything. »
>>
>> « The attitude with which the article is discussed in the mailing list is
>> admirable. »
>>
>> « Couldn't help contrasting it to some popular programming language mailing
>> lists, especially a CSP inspired language by a major search company. »
>>
>>
>>
>> To me, this whole story is a nice example of how we can transform a
>> supposedly bad public announcement into a positive communication.
>
> Agreed. I know someone wanted core to post something, but that seems to
> give too much credibility to the Uber complaints. I also didn't see how
> a core email would have the nuance of these email threads.
So I am that someone, and would be happy to explain that further off-list, but it seems like this is off the table at
thispoint.. Primarily, It was more about having a unified community message coming from us particularly around how we
asa community encourage feedback and are willing to learn from it, and to utilize the resources we have available (e.g.
mailinglists) to air questions and concerns so we can address them.
If the consensus at this point is to let the discussion continue it’s organic course, I’m fine with that.
Thanks,
Jonathan