Tom Lane wrote: > Josh Berkus <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > In general, I think that people who harp on PostgreSQL's lack of a > > benevolent dictator as an inhibitor to progress are people who are not > > comfortable with democracy and are looking for excuses why company X needs > > to "take over the project for its own good." > > I don't recall having seen that idea being pushed for Postgres ... not > seriously anyway. However, it's certainly true that historically we've > had effectively *no* project leadership, in the sense of anyone setting > feature goals for releases or creating a long-term roadmap. Would we > be better off if we had done that? I'm not sure. > > It's pointless to suppose that individual developers would really be > answerable to any project-wide management, since that's not who they're > paid by. So I tend to think that a project roadmap would be more of an > exercise in wishful thinking than a useful management tool. OTOH it > *could* be useful, if there are any developers out there wondering what > they should work on next. Are there any ... and would they listen to a > roadmap if they had one, rather than scratching their own itches? I think the longer someone is with the project the more they start working on what is good for the project, rather than what interests them. I think we have seen many cases of that. -- Bruce Momjian bruce@xxxxxxxxxx EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
