As someone who exists mainly as an active user (and part-time advocate/documentation tweaker), I have found the release of PostgreSQL 7.3 to be disappointing. The ensuing pseudo-flamewar on the various lists has been similarly disappointing.
I was surprised, for instance, to receive a non-list email announcing the release of the software but then to have to wait for days actually to see it show up on the official (or even the advocacy) website in a news item. Even now it is not listed at PostgreSQL, Inc. Consider the pieces of the puzzle here: 1) an official website (http://www.postgresql.org/) 2) an advocacy website (http://advocacy.postgresql.org/) 3) official mailing lists 4) a separate email database 5) a developers' website (http://developers.postgresql.org/) 6) an official ftp site (ftp://ftp.postgresql.org/) 7) mirror websites 8) mirror ftp sites 9) a corporate website (http://www.pgsql.com/) While I have remained impressed with the software itself, the organization of these pieces has left much to be desired for the duration of my involvement as an end user. As someone who works in a small startup company, I am a frequent witness to both the advantages and disadvantages of the lack of a strong benevolent dictatorship in the form of management. I think one of the core problems with the advocacy and presentation of the PostgreSQL project is the fact that it has been a developer-centric project for quite some time, and that process, while there are drivers, does not tend to affect much other than the code. There does not seem to be a single, driving vision (or even a Board or consensus-based vision) behind the public face of PostgreSQL. Granted, when a project is entirely volunteer-based, the management and development are loose. I've noticed that in many such projects, web design and maintenance become very low priority, especially when left to groups of hackers. Witness GNU, Debian, and, I would say PostgreSQL: extremely spare official websites often intimidating and/or difficult for the newbie. I've wanted to see a bit more structure given to the PostgreSQL website, the release process, and various other portions of the project for quite some time, but often it seems as though such a structure would not even be welcome. As someone who has not had time to be a true developer on the project, I'm content to wait for the missing features I'd like to see. Still, I'm hoping that developers and advocates alike realize that the release process and these lists are in the public domain, and the way business is conducted affects the perceptions of users as much as the quality of the software or any amount of marketing. In any case, thanks for all the hard work. I actually thought the text of the email release I received was good and am working on the upgrade process now in my own environment. -tfo In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane) wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >> Marc G. Fournier writes: > >>> It isn't, but those working on -advocacy were asked to help come up with a > >>> stronger release *announcement* then we've had in the past ... > >> > >> Consider that a failed experiment. PostgreSQL is driven by the > >> development group and, to some extent, by the existing user base. The > >> last thing we need is a marketing department in that mix. > > > Peter, I understand your perspective, but I think you are in the > > minority on this one. > > I tend to agree with Peter. Not that we don't need a marketing > presence; we do (I think Great Bridge's marketing efforts are sorely > missed). But the point he is making is that the pgsql mailing lists > go to people who are generally unimpressed by marketing fluff. And > they're already "sold" on PG anyway. > > The right way to handle this next time is to generate a PR-style > press release to send to outside contacts, but to do our more > traditional, technically-oriented announcement on the mailing lists. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
