On Fri, Jun 20, 2003 at 11:14:02PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > There are some, but I still disagree. The biggest advantage of > > PostgreSQL in my opinion has always been that it's a community project > > and not driven by some commercial interests. > > These are not mutually exclusive. Each developer has his own axe to > grind, without doubt; I don't think it matters much whether his goals
Okay, that's true. Actually what I wanted to say is the project must not rely on a kind of sponsorship. Maybe an example could make it more clear. Let's say a company approaches RH and says "We need full replication and we're willing to pay for it, as this is still cheaper than buying the hwole stuff from Oracle or others.". Then RH pays you to do the work. I really like that. And it makes sense for all companies involved. What I do not like, and probably misunderstood in the original email, would be if RH says, "Hey, we've contracted a good software developer to implement replication, no matter that he's not really interested in databases." And with no one paying RH for this work, they may decide at some point to just stop it. Or the developer leaves, etc. This of course is different than paying someone who's already a developer in this project. I love the way PGSQL is run, but have seen some unbelievable stuff in other projects. And it despises me to see companies, that do not even understand how free software development works, jump into a project and try to change it all, just to disappear after a few weeks. Michael -- Michael Meskes Email: Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De ICQ: 179140304, AIM: michaelmeskes, Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL! ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster