Re: Lets (not) break all the things. Was: [pgsql-advocacy] 9.6 -> 10.0

On 13 May 2016, at 21:42, Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> On 05/13/2016 01:04 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> On 05/13/2016 12:03 PM, Josh berkus wrote:
>>> On 05/13/2016 11:48 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>>> On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 12:12 PM, Joshua D. Drake
>>>> <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>>> Anyway, all of this is a moot point, because nobody has the power to
>>> tell the various companies what to do. We're just lucky that everyone
>>> is still committed to writing stuff which adds to PostgreSQL.
>>
>> Lucky? No. We earned it. We earned it through years and years of hard
>> work. Should we be thankful? Absolutely. Should we be grateful that we
>> have such a powerful and engaged commercial contribution base? 100%.
>
> Lucky. Sure there was work and personal integrity involved, but like
> any success story, there was luck.
>
> But we've also been fortunate in not spawning hostile-but-popular forks
> by people who left the project, and that none of the companies who
> created hostile forks were very successful with them, and that nobody
> has seriously tried using lawyers to control/ruin the project.
>
> And, most importantly, we've been lucky that a lot of competing projects
> have self-immolated instead of being successful and brain-draining our
> contributors (MySQL, ANTS, MonetDB, etc.)

Oracle buying MySQL (via Sun) seems to have helped things along pretty
well too. :)

+ Justin

--
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi