Re: [HACKERS] Enticing interns to PostgreSQL

From: Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to>
To: Mitch Pirtle <mitch(dot)pirtle(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Enticing interns to PostgreSQL
Date: 2005-07-23 13:47:00
Message-ID: 20050723134700.GB21932@wolff.to
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 19:34:57 -0400,
Mitch Pirtle <mitch(dot)pirtle(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> I see the biggest difference between MySQL<->PostgreSQL is that MySQL
> has always appeared to be 'owned' by one company, MySQL.com (formerly
> Monty's company IIRC). PostgreSQL has no such 'owner', so there is no
> definitive entity to do business with. RedHat almost pulled this off
> with Linux, but their identity crisis a couple years ago after Robert
> Young left opened the door for all of the others and RedHat lost their
> grip.

I don't think Redhat was ever much of a threat to control Linux. Unlike
mysql.com they don't hold the copyright to Linux and couldn't dual license
it the way mysql.com can. They may have been more dominent in the commercial
Linux distribution market, but there would have been competing distributions.

In response to

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim C. Nasby 2005-07-23 16:24:06 Re: [HACKERS] Enticing interns to PostgreSQL
Previous Message Bruno Wolff III 2005-07-23 13:41:07 Re: [HACKERS] Enticing interns to PostgreSQL

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-07-23 14:18:57 pgsql: In the stats test, delay for the stats collector to catch up
Previous Message Bruno Wolff III 2005-07-23 13:41:07 Re: [HACKERS] Enticing interns to PostgreSQL