Josh Berkus wrote:
>I'll concur with this issue; I can't count the number of times I've said
>"PostgreSQL Inc., a private company not directly associated with the
>PostgreSQL Global Development Group" when recommending Geoff and his crew.
>Americans (and presumably others) are just not comfortable thinking about
>anarchistic organizations (and no, that's not an oxymoron). They want an
>Authority to be in charge. Sort of makes you sad for the state of political
Sure, it happens here in Brazil in a similar way.
>Anyway, regarding certification, I was more thinking that one-to-several of
>the current PG support vendors would develop a curriculum, and then several
>major contributors + core group members would review & approve it.
That's a good idea, but to review that curriculum it would be good to
have some predefined criteria, that's when the standard comes.
>I do think we need a foundation (and will have one) but for fundraising only; it's
>important that such a foundation have no authority over the program.
I agree, but in the case of the certification the foundation could be
responsible for approving the curriliculum with major contributors +
core group members.
>And I do think it's important that we don't end up with 4 competing
>certifications each supported by only one vendor. That way lies madness.
Here in Brazil we already have 2 certification programs, and the way
that PgSQL is becoming popular around here I expect this number to grow
in a near future. If it's dificult to make a standard now, maybe in some
years it will become nearly impossible.
In response to
pgsql-advocacy by date
|Next:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2003-10-27 16:01:55|
|Subject: Re: Press Release and eRServer|
|Previous:||From: Anton de Wet||Date: 2003-10-27 08:50:38|
|Subject: Open Source (and PostgreSQL) in South Africa|