From: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Good software takes 10 years |
Date: | 2001-07-20 12:11:54 |
Message-ID: | 20010720091009.B543-100000@mobile.hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, 20 Jul 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > > Nice article about good software taking ten years to develop. I think
> > > PostgreSQL can be classed at 15 years now, and it is being developed at
> > > Internet speed too:
> > > http://www.joelonsoftware.com/stories/storyReader$368
> >
> > I think the slashdot discussion is more interesting than the original
> > article:
> >
> > http://slashdot.org/developers/01/07/19/0145222.shtml
> >
> > In particular, the slashdotters observe that there's more than one
> > kind of software. For big projects, ten years seems about right...
>
> I am never sure if posting info about appropriate articles is ok for
> this list.
It works ... I did create a pgsql-advocacy ages ago that would be good for
this sort of stuff, if ppl actually used it ...
The only thing I'd suggest is prefixing with something like Article:
<subject> just so that we all know that that is what the thread is about,
but other then that, post away ...
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jakub Ouhrabka | 2001-07-20 12:35:05 | bug in hash indexes??? |
Previous Message | Justin Clift | 2001-07-20 11:21:51 | Re: Good software takes 10 years |