Re: [HACKERS] Increased company involvement

From: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>
To: Rob Butler <crodster2k(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com>, "Nicolai Petri (lists)" <lists(at)petri(dot)cc>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Increased company involvement
Date: 2005-05-01 01:59:56
Message-ID: 200504302159.56055.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers

Just wanted to address a couple of specific items here...

On Saturday 30 April 2005 08:54, Rob Butler wrote:
> I read the hackers list all the time, and have for
> years, and my company sponsors PG events every few
> months, and I would consider myself fairly "plugged
> in" to PG, and this is the first I have seen/heard of
> the PostgreSQL Foundation
> http://thepostgresqlfoundation.org/

We have deliberatly kept it low key and unadvertised, mainly because we feel
that we don't yet have the infrastructure in place to play a more prominant
role. By infrastructure here I am mainly reffering to legal paperwork that
we have filed but are waiting for a response on from the government... all we
can do is wait on that stuff.

> Also, while PG foundation website states "The
> PostgreSQL Foundation does not in any way control the
> development of the PostgreSQL project" maybe it should
> to some extent. The PG Core dev group should be
> honorary top level members, and continue working as
> they always have. But the PG foundation is their
> official contact point. I don't see Tom's or Bruce's
> names in the PG foundation member list, which is odd
> and disturbing.

There has been a lot of discussion on this topic quite a number of times. Let
me assure you that Tom and Bruce have been included on things from the
begining while having been spared getting dragged into the day to day
machinations of things. Since we are primarily focused on advocacy efforts at
this point, this is probably a good way to position things for now.

> Basically, the PG foundation is a good thing, and the
> core hackers should be more involved and represented
> in it.

For the record 3 of the 6 core team members are involved in the foundation. As
for whomever else you would consider a core hacker, the membership includes a
wide number of postgresql's long time contributors and community advocates.
Right now things are being approached on a small scale while we get our ducks
in a row, but once complete you can expect to see things become a little more
visible.

--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL

In response to

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marc G. Fournier 2005-05-01 23:58:51 Re: [HACKERS] Increased company involvement
Previous Message Robert Treat 2005-05-01 01:40:46 Re: [HACKERS] Increased company involvement

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2005-05-01 06:00:17 Re: SPI bug.
Previous Message Robert Treat 2005-05-01 01:40:46 Re: [HACKERS] Increased company involvement