Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Version Numbering

From: Jean-Michel POURE <jm(dot)poure(at)freesurf(dot)fr>
To: <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Version Numbering
Date: 2002-12-13 15:16:57
Message-ID: 200212131616.57553.jm.poure@freesurf.fr (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy
Le Vendredi 13 Décembre 2002 15:56, Merlin Moncure a écrit :
> Do not underestimate how important windows compatibility is to the small
> /medium business world.

IMHO, this is not so important.

End-users are looking for are good performance, extensive features, 
reliability and real information (not like MySQL which markets would-be 
features before implementation. SAP-DB says they have 100 developpers 
working, but in the real world only ... three of them commit code to CVS). DO 
NOT BELIEVE users believe such crap. In the end, MySQL and SAP-DB will suffer 
from these lies.

As for PostgreSQL :
- 7.4 means : look, we are reliable, we provide a real product, we will still 
be here in 20 years... That's why you can choose us.
- 8.0 means : Hey man, look at my product, it's new... (but what will you do 
when you reach numbre 15?)...

I vote for 7.4

On the converse, I am concerned by companies which rename PostgreSQL into some 
stu... names. Example : RedHat dabase. Why not Nasa database, Corn Flakes 
database or Hutu database? This destroys the image of PostgreSQL because 
users are confused.

This is why pgAdmin II & III have a special open-source activist licence. 
RedHat will never get pgAdmin and rename it to some stu... name.

OK, this was just my 2 cents.
Jean-Michel POURE

In response to

Responses

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Neil ConwayDate: 2002-12-13 15:20:44
Subject: Re: Version Numbering
Previous:From: Neil ConwayDate: 2002-12-13 15:15:56
Subject: Re: Version Numbering

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group