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

Re: Press Release, Final Draft?

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Press Release, Final Draft?
Date: 2004-09-23 03:21:04
Message-ID: 200409222021.04273.josh@agliodbs.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy
Peter,

> Why is this the final draft if the release it still more than one month
> away?

Three reasons:  
1) translations;
2) a couple of the companies I approached about quotes insisted on seeing a 
semi-final version of the press release.   One of them has a major 
departmental meeting on Friday so I picked tommorrow as a deadline.
3) without an arbitrary deadline, we'll keep tinkering forever.

> I like where this is going, but of course I have a couple of comments.

Great.  I was getting worried you were on vacation or something. ;-)

> > PARAGRAPH ONE:
> > My Version:
> > NY, NY: October XX, 2004 - The PostgreSQL Global Development group
>
> Why "NY, NY"?

Press releases require a location for the dateline (for example, PRWeb won't 
accept one without it).    NY, NY is traditional for US-based releases which 
don't have a specific location.   I'd be fine with Sydney, Australia, 
Pittsburgh, Pennslyvania, Tokyo or whatever people want.

> There tends to be a lot of "drama" in the press release drafts.  Drama
> is about conflict and suspense, which we really don't want.  A term
> like "significantly" might be better.

Hmm ... "geometrically"?  "tremendously"?  "exceptionally"?   Seriously, the 
windows port alone is going to double the size of our community (for better 
or for worse); "significantly" doesn't seem strong enough.

> > PARAGRAPH TWO:
> > My version:
> > In addition to reaching a new milestone in scalability, PostgreSQL
>
> I concur with others that there is no milestone in scalability.

And I ask again for suggestions on alternative language.

>
> > Windows:
> > My Version, Same as Draft Seven:
> > Native Windows Support:  PostgreSQL now works natively with Windows
> > systems and does not need an emulation layer.  This provides
>
> ... *on* Windows *operating* systems ...
>
> > dramatically improved performance over previous versions, and offers
> > a compelling alternative to proprietary database software for
> > independent software vendors, corporate users, and individual Windows
> > developers.
>
> Again, there is no drama here.

Hmmm ... actually, I'm seeing some stuff in that paragraph which is redundant 
with other paragraphs.   Let me try:

Native Windows Support:  the PostgreSQL server now runs natively on Windows
operating systems without Unix emulation software.  This  offers a compelling
alternative to proprietary database software for independent software vendors, 
corporate users, and individual Windows developers.

... shorter because I don't think we really need to oversell the Windows port; 
in fact, I'll bet that at least 1/4 of our press coverage won't mention any 
features other than the Windows port.

> > Savepoints:  This SQL-standard feature allows specific parts of a
> > database transaction to be rolled back without aborting the entire
> > operation. This benefits business application developers who require
>
> ... entire transaction.

hmmm ... how about " ... to be rolled back without aborting."   I don't want 
to use "transaction" twice in a sentence unless my back's to the wall.

> Somehow I feel that this wording is confusing; I wouldn't know what PITR
> really does.  How does it tie in with existing features and how does it
> respond to users' needs.  Obviously, PostgreSQL had some kind of data
> recovery before, but that makes it look like now it really has it or
> something.

Well, I had another version but Simon vetoed it.   Simon?

> It's not "an" Adaptive Replacement Cache, it's "the" Adaptive
> Replacement Cache algorithm.  How about this change:  "Disk and memory
> usage have been optimized through the use of the Adaptive Replacement
> Cache algorithm, the new background writer, and the new lazy vacuum
> feature."

OK.

> There is no capital P in pgpool.

Good to know.

> > With more than 18 years of development by hundreds of the world's
> > most generous and brilliant minds from the open source community,
>
> I think this really goes too far with the self-glorification.

We've used it before.  Suggestions?

> PostgreSQL is available under a BSD-style license, which imposes no
> restrictions on commercial or noncommercial redistribution and use.

well, gramatically it's:
PostgreSQL is available under a BSD-style license, which imposes restrictions 
on neither commercial nor noncommercial redistribution and use.  

I also question the need for "-style".    Last I checked, we were using *the* 
BSD license.

-- 
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

In response to

Responses

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Greg Sabino MullaneDate: 2004-09-23 11:03:42
Subject: Re: Press Release, Final Draft?
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2004-09-22 23:27:36
Subject: Re: Press Release, Final Draft?

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