Bruce Momjian wrote:
>What incentive do you want us to give? We don't have any. And if
>someone does it, we will find a place for it.
>
>
>
A contributor of a product is perhaps not too eager to highlight the
weaknesses and explain the use cases where another product might be a
better choice :-).
A committee with unbiased people, or with members from all camps, would
be a much more likely group to come up with good recommendations.
Especially if they, after some discussions concerning solutions,
implementations, etc. ended up with two or more similar products
suitable for slightly different purposes.
>I think you want us to look more like a MySQL AB or Oracle company where
>things are more bundled and blessed. It isn't going to happen with us
>because we aren't a company, don't make money, and don't control anyone.
>
>
>
No, not really. PostgreSQL is a well established Open Source community
with a good reputation and very skilled people. For many people that's
even better than a company since you get rid of all the marketing
bullshit. You have firm control over the core backend and you control
all contributions that are made to it. I'm asking you to extend the
committee and its responsibilities to so that:
a) More software can make use of your good name and reputation.
b) Users will find it and be able to install it easily.
e) Users will consider it fairly secure to use the software.
d) All developers get better reuse of, and can improve on, the core
infrastructure.
e) Releases would be synchronized.
Regards,
Thomas Hallgren