Re: [HACKERS] Companies involved in development

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Companies involved in development
Date: 2002-08-15 17:53:39
Message-ID: 200208151753.g7FHrdF11434@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers


Of course, any funding information would be shared by the core group so
they are involved, but not shared to the general list until the company
wishes.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> I think I spelled -advocacy correctly this time.
>
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 05:34:13PM +0200, Hans-J?rgen Sch?nig wrote:
> > I think it would be a huge benefit for the community to have some more
> > company-funding. This would lead to the implementation of some features
> > people need urgently (replication in the core and so forth). On the
>
> > For a company PostgreSQL definitely is an interesting area to invest
> > because it has proven to be a good product and there are just minor
> > things (sync. replication - eg. Postgres-R) missing to make it a real
> > enterprise database. The support of the community of more than just
> > optimal and it is an interesting subject.
>
> > Also: It would be interesting to have a special section on the website
> > where people can post that they need money to implement something really
> > useful. I guess there'd be a lot of people who'd pay for replication or
> > things like that if they knew more.
>
> Some time ago, I posted that I was looking for people interested in
> making the replication stuff complete. I'm still working on that
> (and I _may_ be getting somewhere, BTW), but there is a lot of work
> to be done there, and I think quite a bit of high-quality code needs
> to be written. And that high-quiality code requires high-quality
> developers.
>
> Now, it strikes me that sometimes, several companies might be able to
> afford to subsidise this sort of development, if only they had a way
> of getting together to do this. I find that the corporate folks here
> really like the idea of "co-development". The idea is to spread the
> risk, where everyone gets the return. Can anyone think of an idea of
> how to set up some sort of organisation to do this? Or maybe, are
> commercial organisations like PostgreSQL the best answer? The
> problem is frequently that the names of the funders frequently need
> to remain secret-ish, because a lot of companies are reluctant to
> discuss using Postgres.
>
> Any suggestions? I know I'd have an easier sell to support this sort
> of development if we didn't have to foot the whole bill.
>
> A
>
> --
> ----
> Andrew Sullivan 87 Mowat Avenue
> Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada
> <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> M6K 3E3
> +1 416 646 3304 x110
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
>

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ross J. Reedstrom 2002-08-15 21:13:47 Re: Companies involved in development
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-08-15 17:52:36 Re: [HACKERS] Companies involved in development

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2002-08-15 17:57:08 Re: Standard replication interface?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-08-15 17:52:36 Re: [HACKERS] Companies involved in development