Re: Lets (not) break all the things. Was: [pgsql-advocacy] 9.6 -> 10.0

On 05/13/2016 01:04 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On 05/13/2016 12:03 PM, Josh berkus wrote:
>> On 05/13/2016 11:48 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 12:12 PM, Joshua D. Drake
>>> <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Anyway, all of this is a moot point, because nobody has the power to
>> tell the various companies what to do. We're just lucky that everyone
>> is still committed to writing stuff which adds to PostgreSQL.
>
> Lucky? No. We earned it. We earned it through years and years of hard
> work. Should we be thankful? Absolutely. Should we be grateful that we
> have such a powerful and engaged commercial contribution base? 100%.

Lucky. Sure there was work and personal integrity involved, but like
any success story, there was luck.

But we've also been fortunate in not spawning hostile-but-popular forks
by people who left the project, and that none of the companies who
created hostile forks were very successful with them, and that nobody
has seriously tried using lawyers to control/ruin the project.

And, most importantly, we've been lucky that a lot of competing projects
have self-immolated instead of being successful and brain-draining our
contributors (MySQL, ANTS, MonetDB, etc.)

--
--
Josh Berkus
Red Hat OSAS
(any opinions are my own)