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

Re: [GENERAL] Governance WAS: MySQL gets $19.5 MM

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Dennis Gearon <gearond(at)cvc(dot)net>,Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info>,pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Governance WAS: MySQL gets $19.5 MM
Date: 2003-06-21 17:49:58
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-advocacypgsql-general

> (And how do we decide what's the best interest of the project as a
> whole, anyway?  Well, community consensus is the only way that I can
> see.  Again, the critical factor is that no one voice drown out the
> rest.)

Well, a lot of it has been about the core committee and trust.   The rest of 
us trust the core committee to promote what they think is best for 
PostgreSQL, and not what their employers think, unless the two are compatible 
(for example, I don't think anyone objects to SRA's pushing Windows ... ).   
Plus most of the core committee is very active on the mailing lists and 
actively fields user requests and answers user opinions.

So if one of us gets mad that a feature or patch was turned down, nobody is 
left with the opinion that it's becuase the core committee wasn't paying 
attention or is speaking for their employers.  Nor would any every expect 
that we would see a feature that had been rejected for the TODO list suddenly 
appear in the source tree.  If private companies using their own money want 
to change the *priorities* on the TODO list, that's fine -- and no different 
from volunteer programmers with an itch to scratch, except maybe in scale.

Besides, I think most of us  active participants have some business related to 
Postgres.  I'm a consultant, for example, and I freely admit that I pushed 
for not waiting for Win32 and PITR for 7.4 because some of my clients want to 
use 7.4 now and not later, with or without those features.

Sometimes the process breaks down a bit ... I can think of a few features 
which were discussed and accepted on the Hackers list and then rejected when 
they reached Patches ... but the vast majority of the time it works better 
than the projects I know with a larger community and a more formal governance 

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

In response to

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Joe ConwayDate: 2003-06-21 17:50:01
Subject: interesting PHP/MySQL thread
Previous:From: The Hermit HackerDate: 2003-06-21 14:40:52
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] MySQL gets $19.5 MM

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Joe ConwayDate: 2003-06-21 17:50:01
Subject: interesting PHP/MySQL thread
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2003-06-21 16:09:43
Subject: Re: Problem with cursor

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group