Re: change to interfaces.html

Dave Page wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Just because a company does the primary development that does not mean
>> it is not community code. Command Prompt is "core" on the ODBCng
>> project. Nothing more.
>
> Then you and I clearly have a different definition of 'community'. I use
> the word to mean a project that is run under the community banner, e.g.
> postgresql.org or pgfoundry.org or some other public open source project
> site, and more importantly, is not likely to be mistaken as a poduct of
> a commercial entity.

O.k. well then I just say "bah". Your definition is the same as mine.
Just because I have ".com" after my domain means nothing.
>
> In this case the website is well and truly CP branded,

PostgreSQL.org is branded as well and *no* there is no difference.

> clearly labelled
> as commercially supported by you,

You are using it as a negative that open source software is commercially
supported?

> about where I should submit a patch, except possibly the mailing list -
> but that doesn't say whether it's a developers list, announce list or
> what :-(

So your real complaint is that we didn't spend more time on the website
and instead chose to keep it bare? O.k. well if you look at the the
website again (and for those following the thread):

http://projects.commandprompt.com/public/odbcng

Notice the use of the word "projects" and "public" and perhaps the large
declaratory announcement on the front page that it is GPL (and thus open
source). We have also made it more explicit that we invite people to
join the development.

>
> I don't even seem to be able to log a ticket - there's no email address
> I can see, nor is there an obvious 'Log a Ticket' link anywhere.
>

Mailing list.

> My only option seems to be the company providing commercial support, or
> the big yellow 'Contact Us' button. Oh, hang on...
>

Again, ignoring the mailing list right there on the front page in black
and white.

I have updated the website to make it more obvious because although Dave
is obviously got a bias here, he had a valid point that we could have
been more obvious on how to participate. We have tried to make it more
clear now and I hope that this resolves any further disputes.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake