Charging for PostgreSQL

As Melvin mentioned, this belongs in a new thread.

> Just one last example. Consider the music industry. For years Apple amongst others promoted low cost per unit downloads and then streaming. We all know the history.
>
> Once a thriving industry music industry has been decimated. Neither the musicians nor song writers receive proper income any more.
> All the major players recognise its current state is unsustainable.
So? In an odd twist of things, the developers here are either being paid
to work on PostgreSQL or are _volunteering_ their time. It would be
extremely rude to take their _volunteered_ time and profit from it.
Ditto for support, such as this forum and the IRC channel.

We can debate the music industry all day. My view is that it's
inefficient, corrupt, and poorly managed. A more streamlined system
would result in more money to the artists themselves. They are not a
good comparison to a F/OSS project.

> *I am sure neither of us want to see postgresql to falter.*
And I have no idea how you think charging for PostgreSQL won't make it
falter. People will move to other free databases or move to paid
offerings along the thought process of "no one was ever fired for buying
ibm"

> Of course the right balance needs to be struck but for me at least the idea of free lunch has had its day.
How does PostgreSQL being free affect you in a _negative_ way? This
"free lunch" is the reason we have the technology and world that we do.
I'm honestly curious why you have an issue with this. Not charging for
code has not prevented a plethora of other projects from having a
growing community. Those issues become moot when you force the community
to disappear. We need to understand what keeps new devs away and fix it
-- not simply force everyone away.

> There can be a low enough charge that people don't feel too much of a pinch but enough to sustain the progress of postgresql.
No. There can't. Going from free to anything will decrease your user
base, especially when there are free alternatives and very large, and
(unfortunately) trusted names you can pay for a database. I've dealt
with this at many companies.

> I genuinely don't like arguments over emails. These are complex issues.
I personally find it easier than arguing in person. But to each his own.
If you don't like arguing then there is nothing that says you must argue.

> Again I for one will continue to support postgresql team whatever their decision may be.
That decision has already been made. Unless you can overcome the
_idealogical_
reason that PostgreSQL is F/OSS in the first place, then I'm not sure
this is an argument worth continuing.

Jim

>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-general-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org [mailto:pgsql-general-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of James Keener
> Sent: 06 January 2016 15:04
> To: FarjadFarid(ChkNet); 'Karsten Hilbert'; pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Code of Conduct: Is it time?
>
>> My only aim is further progress of postgresql.
> Charging for it would do exactly that. Most people would simply switch to MySQL (or Maria) or stop upgrading/upgrade to a fork.
>
>> As per Sun Microsystem’s case charging zero dollars (for Java and
>> mysql) means there is zero income.
> Why do you think this is a company? There _are_ companies that offer support and coding. While I'm sure everyone would agree that developers should be able to eat (and more/better than Raman), the point of the "The PostgreSQL Global Development Group" and being "The world's most advanced open source database" is not to become Ellison. The commercial support and consulting offerings are there to make the money. The rest of us plebs just have to help each other out.
>
> Had PostgreSQL started out/never became open source, we would be having a very different discussion (about a very different product, if it still existed). As it stands, fundamentally shifting the goals, objectives, MO of a libre and beer free software project to something other than that is going to be met with a lot of resistance because it shifts how we as users interact with something we've interacted with in a certain way and with certain expectations for years.
>
>> Emails are not the best medium for consulting about complex issues.
> Emails are actually a decent medium because they allow one to express themselves in a well thought out and clear way. It just has to be used correctly (and I'm not insinuating I'm great at that).
>
> I'm not sure who Farjad is; is this a serious proposal or "just something someone said"? I feel religious about PostgreSQL as it really has changed how I view databases in general (and you know what they say about converts). Not that I matter, but I would feel a huge blow if I could no longer tell people to use it.
>
> Jim
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org) To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>