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

Re: Time to work on Press Release 8.0

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, Dan Langille <dan(at)langille(dot)org>,pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Time to work on Press Release 8.0
Date: 2004-08-13 14:29:29
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-advocacy
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Aug 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> >> On Fri, 13 Aug 2004, Jan Wieck wrote:
> >>
> >>> Every time PostgreSQL is discussed, be that slashdot or LWN or other
> >>> forums or even interviews with any of out competitors, the statement is
> >>> "doesn't have replication". If we avoid the topic in our 8.0 press
> >>> release and leave out the word replication, instead of pointing to the
> >>> reasons why it is *better not to have replication builtin*, we will
> >>> lose. People will read the press release, don't see the word
> >>> replication, so "No Replication - checkmark".
> >>
> >> Except that "Have Replication" to those claiming 'No Replicatin' means
> >> "Integrated with the Server", we still don't *have* Replication in their
> >> minds, no matter how many external projects that do it we mention ;(
> >
> > Both Joshua Drake and Marc sell commercial replication solutions.  Do
> > you think it is fair of the community to mention BSD-licensed
> > replication solutions in our press release while not mentioning
> > commercial ones?
> Neither Joshua or I are advocating mentioning either of our replication 
> solutions ... that is not (or at least not for us) the discussion ... the 
> discussion is whether or not it is appropriate to highlight a 3rd party 
> add on (which is what Slony is) as part of *our* Release Announcement ...
> For those that are advocating in favor of this, to try and quell the 'we 
> do not have replication' proponents, that isn't going to work since Slony 
> is *still* an Add-On, and is not integrated.
> And, for those that are wondering about putting it into contrib, that 
> doesn't make it any less of an Add-On in those ppls minds ...
> ... so we aren't buying anything, and, again, we are reducing the focus on 
> what we *do* include (NT, PITR, native Win32, etc) ...
> The PR should be focusing on *our* features ... that which comes with 
> *our* distribution ... not on something someone else wrote that works with 
> PostgreSQL ...
> But, as one person has mentioned in this thread, as an attempt at a voice 
> of sanity ... maybe we should just let this drop, and see how the PR 
> fleshes out ... maybe we *don't* have enough in this release to do a 
> strong Press Release, and need to mentioned add-on stuff to make it big 
> enough to be picked up by the press *shrug*

We are already planning to mention server-side java in the release
announcement.  That isn't integrated either, but I think we should
mention it also.

In fact I want to write a documentation section talking about add-ons,
why the exist (are not integrated), and how to get them.

  Bruce Momjian                        |
  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


pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Marc G. FournierDate: 2004-08-13 14:31:10
Subject: Re: Time to work on Press Release 8.0
Previous:From: Marc G. FournierDate: 2004-08-13 14:26:49
Subject: Re: Time to work on Press Release 8.0

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