| From: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Galbavy <peter(dot)galbavy(at)knowtion(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Claudio Natoli <claudio(dot)natoli(at)memetrics(dot)com>, "'Lamar Owen'" <lowen(at)pari(dot)edu>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: The big MySQL spin |
| Date: | 2004-03-11 15:48:22 |
| Message-ID: | 1079020102.2784.447.camel@camel |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
On Thu, 2004-03-11 at 08:15, Peter Galbavy wrote:
> Claudio Natoli wrote:
> >> Benevolent oligarchy is the term you want.
> >
> > Oligarchic technocracy?
>
> Oligarchic Meritocracy ?
>
Certainly you've hit an important point in the discussion bringing up
meritocracy. With PostgreSQL, people's ability to shape the
direction/features of PostgreSQL is based on the merits of their work
and/or ideas, and the ascent to positions of control follow the same
path. With something like my$ql, ascent to a position of power is not
given from the community, but must be obtained from the corporation.
my$ql may say they are a republic / representative democracy, but given
that one party controls who all the candidates are there isn't much need
for voting...
Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2004-03-11 16:16:13 | Re: Org Types, was: The big MySQL spin |
| Previous Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2004-03-11 14:29:42 | Re: The big MySQL spin |