Re: On what we want to support: travel?
От | Josh Berkus |
---|---|
Тема | Re: On what we want to support: travel? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 45492671.1040804@agliodbs.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: On what we want to support: travel? ("Christopher Browne" <cbbrowne@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: On what we want to support: travel?
Re: On what we want to support: travel? Re: On what we want to support: travel? |
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
All, I think that Peter has a point here ... both standards bodies and OSS conferences attract new users. The question is what kind of new users we want to attract. That is, while PostgreSQL can always use more Perl hackers and OSS-CRMs supporting/using our database, it's probably more important to attract the interest of bank CTOs and major manufacturer procurement managers. We want to be evaluated as an enterprise RDBMS before an open source RDBMS. So I can see that. However, I'll stand my evaluation that we need to work on "bang for the buck" basis. Some of these standards bodies and trade groups can absorb enormous amounts of money while delivering questionable benefits (having been to TPC meetings, the TPC falls into this class in my mind) wheras others are more modest and provide immediate opportunities. So I might put the latter ahead of flying David to Brazil, but not the former. There's a thing we do at Sun and other large corporations called an "ROI" where we go: this is how much money I need, and this is what I expect us to get out of it. I really think this is the approach we should take on evaluating expenditures, rather than trying to say "category x comes ahead of category y". --Josh Berkus
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: