Re: Vote on Windows installer links

Jussi Mikkola wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Ok, I think the original question was that does EDB get too much
> visibility versus other contributors, because they happen to
> work on the installer and their logo is seen there. Is that too
> much compared to people/companies that work on something else
> that is not so visible. For example parallel restore.
>
> Now, in my opinion the approach has been that should EDB visibility
> be reduced so that it is on the same level that others are. But,
> as I see it, there are two separate issues. One is, that is EDB
> visibility fair compared to others, and the other point is that
> how much that visibility should be.
>
> Sofar, it seems that people have the idea that commercial support
> is bad and that we should limit the visibility of companies on
> PostgreSQL website or sites related to it. In my opinion there
> is also another possibility, to increase the visibility of
> others. Isn't it good for the community, if there are many
> companies working on PostgreSQL? If that is good, then why don't
> we show that? And if we get more companies involved by showing
> that they have done something for the project, isn't that a good
> thing?
>
> Now, the installer is visible. What if we would give there credit
> to more companies that have helped the project, rather than
> removing any? And, yes, if the commercial alternative costs x
> k?, I think you can look 10 secs of adds when installing an open
> source one.

Wow, that is interesting.  I think you are right that the visibility of
the installer is asymetric with the visibility of some other community
contributions.  I think that is related to the general issue that _edge_
features get more visibility than core stuff --- we do major stuff with
the optimizer in every release but it rarely gets much release note
mention --- it just works better.  (In fact sometimes I add it and Tom
removes it.)

pgadmin, which is much simpler than the core code, gets more flash
attention than the backend.

I think this is happening because we _don't_ try to get involved in
balancing visibility stuff.  The external stuff is by its very nature
external and gets more visibility.  I think it is admirable if we can
get backend stuff more company visibility, if we can figure out a clean
way to do it.  Right now it works because we _don't_ inject ourselves
into that.

Let me also add that I get more visibility in the release notes than is
warranted because I tend to do more user-facing, edge stuff, which is
unfair, but when we try to be fair we end up with release notes that
seem distored.  We did talk about this a while ago.

--
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +