Re: Good software takes 10 years

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 ...

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  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