Re: Version Numbering

On Sat, 14 Dec 2002, Josh Berkus wrote:

> Folks,
>
> > This license was driven mostly by RedHat renaming PostgreSQL into
> > RedHat
> > database, a few days after the development of pgAdmin II started.
> >
> > Recently, RedHat did a lot of harm to KDE3 in their 8.0 edition. Did
> > you find
> > any Kpackage in RedHat 8.0? In a few months, people may have to pay
> > to
> > downlad the software they wrote on their own!
>
> I don't agree with the Red-Hat-bashing sentiment expressed in this and
> elsewhere. Sure, RH did rename their PostgreSQL version *for branding
> and marketing reasons*. However, they are employing at least one
> full-time PostgreSQL hacker, and their "value-add" administration tools
> have, at this point, all been contributed to the community. Red Hat,
> regardless of their *marketing* decisions on what versions and
> alterations of OSS software they distribute, have *always* made the
> source available to their Linux products.

I hope you weren't including me in that 'RH-bashing', as it wasn't my
intent ... I personally think that GB did alot more harm to PgSQL then
good, since they worked hard for a short period of time to promote
themselves as "PostgreSQL", and then flop'd ... RH, with their renaming,
is indirectly protecting us from 'shifts in the marketing wind', so that
if something does happen in the future that makes it politically
unfeasible to back PgSQL (the MySQL guys buy them out), ppl don't see "yet
another company go under" in relation to PgSQL ...