X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.2]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 630EBD1DF92 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 23:07:12 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 82263-01 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 23:06:55 -0300 (ADT) Received: from candle.pha.pa.us (candle.pha.pa.us [207.106.42.251]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6916FD1E5DC for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 23:06:50 -0300 (ADT) Received: (from pgman@localhost) by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.11.6) id i3U26kk02397; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 22:06:46 -0400 (EDT) From: Bruce Momjian Message-Id: <200404300206.i3U26kk02397@candle.pha.pa.us> Subject: Re: Promoting PostgreSQL to the world. In-Reply-To: <1083270087.30065.408.camel@jester> To: Rod Taylor Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 22:06:46 -0400 (EDT) Cc: Peter Eisentraut , Josh Berkus , "pgsql-www@postgresql.org" X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL108 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests= X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200404/274 X-Sequence-Number: 4378 Rod Taylor wrote: > On Thu, 2004-04-29 at 15:56, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > That is my point. Are we going to require a certain level of > > > acceptable usage for someone to use the name? > > > > It's easy to shoot yourself in the foot that way. You may find that the > > next Debian release will contain a package "database whose name we are > > not allowed to use" and everything is stripped of logos and icons > > because they are not free to use. It has happened before. > > I think that is different though. They're simply redistributing exactly > what we gave them (compiled, but still the same). Uh, one linux distribution add an option to pg_hba.conf. We only found out when someone reported it as not working, so that redistribution thing isn't 100%. > > We already have issues with users adding patches to the database, like > CONNECT BY, which have a number of bugs. If Debian applied those patches > by default and a flood of Debian users started complaining about our > buggy software what would we do? If it would be to tell them they're not > using an official release, then it shouldn't have the PostgreSQL name on > it. Sure, we tell them and they know it. The idea that somehow we are going to get a bad name seems a minor risk compared to the management nightmare of trying to certify everything. If we certify it and it is bad, we really have a problem. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073