Re: Press Release Party
От | Marc G. Fournier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Press Release Party |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20040424100001.N42925@ganymede.hub.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Press Release Party (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Press Release Party
|
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
On Sat, 24 Apr 2004, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Robert Treat wrote: > > Well said Peter. Josh, can you speak to whether or not there are > > other parties involved in the press release that need us to keep the > > discussion secret? If so then I think we need to respect that desire, > > but I'm not sure if that is actually the case. Peter, given your > > analogy, I think Josh can take the discussion about a press release > > off-list in order to get something of quality put together and then > > post that for public review before sending it out (like someone > > saying I want to code feature x, getting a few guys to help him on > > it, and then posting the results to patches before it gets included). > > Do you see any problems with that? > > I don't even have a problem if on occasion the actual text of the press > release, or the name of the external partner, or actual locations or > amounts are not revealed ahead of time. But it's only fair that the > group affected by the press release (say, hackers or www or advocacy or > jdbc) gets to know the general idea and gets to discuss it. Maybe this > press release is that a company wants to sponsor a particular feature, > but then after the press release it turns out that 9 out of 10 > developers think the feature is stupid? How does that make us look? Who cares? If the resultant patch isn't considered acceptable by the community, it just won't get applied *shrug* ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: