EDB taking over?

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
41 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

EDB taking over?

Andreas Pflug
I wonder how many non-EDB contributors have seen the One-Click
installer; I never used it until 8.4. I was quite irritated how
prominently the EnterpriseDB lettering is placed on the installer; apart
from a tiny "Packaged by" the graphics is a pgsql Elephant with a big
"EnterpriseDB(tm)" on top, with no PostgreSQL lettering around. From the
installer's appearance, you could get the impression EDB is the company
behind postgres.

I've seen some EDB impact on pgadmin's design principles a while ago;
pgadmin could be considered as the face of pgsql (since most win32
first-time users probably will have the first contact to pgsql via
pgadmin), so while this message's subject is certainly an exaggeration,
I see tendencies for EnterpriseDB to use pgsql infrastructure as
marketing vehicle more and more.


Regards,
Andreas


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EDB taking over?

Dave Page-7
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Andreas Pflug<[hidden email]> wrote:
> I wonder how many non-EDB contributors have seen the One-Click
> installer; I never used it until 8.4. I was quite irritated how
> prominently the EnterpriseDB lettering is placed on the installer; apart
> from a tiny "Packaged by" the graphics is a pgsql Elephant with a big
> "EnterpriseDB(tm)" on top, with no PostgreSQL lettering around. From the
> installer's appearance, you could get the impression EDB is the company
> behind postgres.

EDB *is* the company behind those installers. We have a number of
people working on them, between two and three working full time in the
lead up to 8.4 on testing and development.

The logo is a large elephant logo, which is probably 3 times the size
of the 'packaged by edb' logo. It is shown on 2 of the 9 installer
screens.

The splash screen shown by the installer at startup is based on the
blue gradient website banner, containing the elephant, and 'world's
most advanced open source database' tagline, with no EDB logo or text
etc. at all.

> I've seen some EDB impact on pgadmin's design principles a while ago;
> pgadmin could be considered as the face of pgsql (since most win32
> first-time users probably will have the first contact to pgsql via
> pgadmin), so while this message's subject is certainly an exaggeration,
> I see tendencies for EnterpriseDB to use pgsql infrastructure as
> marketing vehicle more and more.

You wrote the original EDB support in pgAdmin, so I'm not sure you can
complain too hard about that :-p. I will note that in 1.10, pgAdmin
has enhanced support for Greenplum, and unless you're running either
Postgres Plus AS or Greenplum database (where the database specific
features will become visible), pretty much wherever you see EDB in
pgAdmin, you will also see Greenplum.

--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK:   http://www.enterprisedb.com

--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EDB taking over?

Andreas Pflug
Dave Page wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Andreas Pflug<[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>
> EDB *is* the company behind those installers. We have a number of
> people working on them, between two and three working full time in the
> lead up to 8.4 on testing and development.
>  

EDB appears as company behind the whole package, not just the installer.
Also please note that this message was primarily addressed to non-EDB
contributors, to check if they might feel the same.

> The splash screen shown by the installer at startup is based on the
> blue gradient website banner, containing the elephant, and 'world's
> most advanced open source database' tagline, with no EDB logo or text
> etc. at all.
>  
Admittedly, but quite tiny, and fading fast. I recognized what can be
read there, but first-time users probably won't.

>  
>> I've seen some EDB impact on pgadmin's design principles a while ago;
>> pgadmin could be considered as the face of pgsql (since most win32
>> first-time users probably will have the first contact to pgsql via
>> pgadmin), so while this message's subject is certainly an exaggeration,
>> I see tendencies for EnterpriseDB to use pgsql infrastructure as
>> marketing vehicle more and more.
>>    
>
> You wrote the original EDB support in pgAdmin, so I'm not sure you can
> complain too hard about that :-p. I will note that in 1.10, pgAdmin
> has enhanced support for Greenplum, and unless you're running either
> Postgres Plus AS or Greenplum database (where the database specific
> features will become visible), pretty much wherever you see EDB in
> pgAdmin, you will also see Greenplum.
>  

I've mentioned *design principles*, not systems or specific features
supported (actually, the opposite: std features suppressed). I've
noticed a shift that reminded me of the very first EDB pgadmin
derivative. However, I wasn't going to discuss pgadmin.

Regards,
Andreas


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EDB taking over?

Dave Page-7
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Andreas Pflug<[hidden email]> wrote:

> EDB appears as company behind the whole package, not just the installer.

That's precisely why it says 'Packaged by' prominently in the graphic,
and why in places like the Add/Remove Programs entry, and executable
resources, it says 'PostgreSQL Global Development Group' and 'The
PostgreSQL DBMS, version 8.4, packaged by EnterpriseDB'.

> Also please note that this message was primarily addressed to non-EDB
> contributors, to check if they might feel the same.

Sure, go for it. I'm not going to ignore any misleading claims that
are made though.

> I've mentioned *design principles*, not systems or specific features
> supported (actually, the opposite: std features suppressed). I've
> noticed a shift that reminded me of the very first EDB pgadmin
> derivative.

I've never used the original EDB derivative (except maybe for 5
minutes, many years ago), and noone in EDB has any say over what I put
in pgAdmin, other than to make suggestions. Any design principles that
may have changed are therefore entirely down to me (and I think I
earned the right to steer that project a little :-p )..

> However, I wasn't going to discuss pgadmin.

<shrug> you brought it up.

:-)

--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK:   http://www.enterprisedb.com

--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EDB taking over?

Simon Riggs
In reply to this post by Dave Page-7

On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 10:46 +0100, Dave Page wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Andreas Pflug<[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I wonder how many non-EDB contributors have seen the One-Click
> > installer; I never used it until 8.4. I was quite irritated how
> > prominently the EnterpriseDB lettering is placed on the installer; apart
> > from a tiny "Packaged by" the graphics is a pgsql Elephant with a big
> > "EnterpriseDB(tm)" on top, with no PostgreSQL lettering around. From the
> > installer's appearance, you could get the impression EDB is the company
> > behind postgres.
>
> EDB *is* the company behind those installers. We have a number of
> people working on them, between two and three working full time in the
> lead up to 8.4 on testing and development.

I think Andreas' point is well made. I disagree with any company getting
sole mention on such prominent outputs from the project. The reason for
my disagreement is that this is a change to many years of working
practice by the project.

If there is a relationship between time committed to the project and
amount of visibility on the project's output then many many others are
missing from the credit list. It's clearly advertising space and that is
wrong, at least without payment. If you dislike the moral tone, then I
would say it is of no long term benefit to the project for a single
company to appear to be running the project. If we are "trustees of the
code", how does this help the long term viability of the project? How
does it help get other companies interested in contributing development
resources? I thought the argument was that no single company is behind
PostgreSQL. If we say that, we should try to make sure its true.

We should either
i) remove it
ii) auction/openly charge for the advertising space
iii) have a credits or sponsors list

If the argument is that this is EDB's installer and they can do what
they like, then I want to know at what point the project's installer
became EDB's installer. When did we discuss that the project no longer
has an installer and when did we ask for volunteers to help maintain it,
because EDB will not release its staff to do so without strings
attached? (Surely "ownership" of such things is exactly why open source
was born in the first place).

I've worked lots on the Write Ahead Log internals, but the pg_xlog
directory isn't called pg_xlog_2ndQuadrant. Such an idea ought to be
ridiculous, and the same for installer(s). Probably it ought to say Red
Hat or Tom Lane in very big letters, if anything. Perhaps error messages
ought to occasionally have a HINT saying, "error messages managed by
Peter and translated by Alvaro".

Jokes aside, we stopped advertising on the web sites some time ago. Why
was that? Why don't we have advertising on the docs and the home page
anymore? Why did we stop it there but allow it elsewhere?

I don't think many people will reply, especially when they have to
complain publicly on-list to core team members. It would be interesting
to hold a secret ballot to see who will show their hand then. Can we
hold a survey on whether people think it is wrong to allow any single
company to put its name on works produced by a group project?

Please don't mention that everyone thinks I hate EDB. I'm tired of that
being rolled out every time this kind of thing comes up. Don't keep
pushing the marketing angles and everybody will just say thanks very
much for the contributions, just as they do for many other companies.

--
 Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.com
 PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EDB taking over?

Marc G. Fournier
On Tue, 7 Jul 2009, Simon Riggs wrote:

> We should either
> i) remove it
> ii) auction/openly charge for the advertising space
> iii) have a credits or sponsors list

First, I agree with many points of this thread, but I do want to point out
that like *alot* of companies out there (CMD, EnterpriseDB, Redhat), they
have already sunk a huge amount of money into personnel that are working
directly on the code ...

The OneClick Installer is one of EDB's most *visible* contribution ...
there is nothing stopping someone else with duplicating that effort, but I
doubt that will happen ...

As Dave mentions, EDB employs *several* ppl that work on that installer,
which is not small contribution in terms of both man hours *and* monetary
value ...

We have several places on the web site were we acknowledge other
contributions ... if anything is missing from the installer (and I don't
know that it is), it would be some sort of link *to* the list of Project
Contributors in a prominent way .. but as the installer itself is their
contribution, "charging for advertising space" on it doesn't quite seem
reasonable, unless, of course, EDB wanted to charge for the advertising
space to offset the budget they put into developing and maintaining it?



  ----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email . [hidden email]                              MSN . [hidden email]
Yahoo . yscrappy               Skype: hub.org        ICQ . 7615664

--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EDB taking over?

Peter Eisentraut-2
In reply to this post by Simon Riggs
On Tuesday 07 July 2009 21:38:06 Simon Riggs wrote:
> We should either
> i) remove it
> ii) auction/openly charge for the advertising space
> iii) have a credits or sponsors list

While I have occasionally spoken up about this, I'm not sure how to formulate
a fair set of rules that can apply to everyone.

The page in question is this: <http://www.postgresql.org/download/linux>.  We
do promote an Ubuntu package there, for example.  And even though Ubuntu
installers are not typically graphical, I don't think anyone would really
notice or complain if these packages printed out a notice, "Ubuntu packages
made by Canonical".

And then how is this different from "One-Click Installer made by
EnterpriseDB"?

--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EDB taking over?

Andreas Pflug
Peter Eisentraut wrote:

> On Tuesday 07 July 2009 21:38:06 Simon Riggs wrote:
>  
>> We should either
>> i) remove it
>> ii) auction/openly charge for the advertising space
>> iii) have a credits or sponsors list
>>    
>
> While I have occasionally spoken up about this, I'm not sure how to formulate
> a fair set of rules that can apply to everyone.
>
> The page in question is this: <http://www.postgresql.org/download/linux>.  We
> do promote an Ubuntu package there, for example.  And even though Ubuntu
> installers are not typically graphical, I don't think anyone would really
> notice or complain if these packages printed out a notice, "Ubuntu packages
> made by Canonical".
>
> And then how is this different from "One-Click Installer made by
> EnterpriseDB"?
>  
It's certainly a question how dominantly "Installer provided by XXX" is
placed. I'd be perfectly ok with it if the lettering was a lot more
discreet, and not combined with the official PostgreSQL logo in a
misleading way. Methinks the installer should be used as advertising
space for PostgreSQL purposes only and not be sold, to avoid any such
issues.

But there's also the aspect that the postgres download page for Windows,
Linux and MacOSX will redirect to an EDB page, which really was the
first thing that irritated me (forgot to mention). Why is that so, why
not a postgres page? Do we want/need  EDB to officially host postgres
stuff, esp with PostgreSQL listed as one of EDB's featured products?


Regards,
Andreas

--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EDB taking over?

Simon Riggs
In reply to this post by Peter Eisentraut-2

On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 09:32 +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 July 2009 21:38:06 Simon Riggs wrote:
> > We should either
> > i) remove it
> > ii) auction/openly charge for the advertising space
> > iii) have a credits or sponsors list
>
> While I have occasionally spoken up about this, I'm not sure how to formulate
> a fair set of rules that can apply to everyone.

The main thing for me is that we should have an objective and
transparent process by which these things are decided. We guard the code
with one or two levels of review; we don't need or want too strict a set
of rules, but we do have judges. In the case under discussion there
seems to have been no public discussion on whether an installer would be
issued by PostgreSQL project for this release and there is a clear
conflict of interest for those people responsible.

Let me be very clear that I hold Dave in the highest esteem and make no
personal accusation here. Indeed, I feel we should protect people from
accusations of conflict of interest by removing that possibility.

> The page in question is this: <http://www.postgresql.org/download/linux>.  We
> do promote an Ubuntu package there, for example.  And even though Ubuntu
> installers are not typically graphical, I don't think anyone would really
> notice or complain if these packages printed out a notice, "Ubuntu packages
> made by Canonical".
>
> And then how is this different from "One-Click Installer made by
> EnterpriseDB"?

I think the page in question is
http://www.postgresql.org/download/windows

There is *no* PostgreSQL.org installer for Windows in 8.4, just a link
to an external company's web site.

That is not acceptable, in a project where many volunteers have just
spent much time telling people this across the globe:
"Q: What's the relationship between the PostgreSQL Project,
EnterpriseDB, PostgreSQL Inc., CommandPrompt, SRA, Greenplum, Sun
Microsystems and others?
A: The PostgreSQL project enjoys the support of multiple companies who
sell products or services built with PostgreSQL, and in turn contribute
code, money and staff time to the project. None of them "own"
PostgreSQL, nor is any individual company responsible for PostgreSQL
code development. This is the same as Linux, Apache or FreeBSD."

It clearly isn't the same as Linux, Apache or FreeBSD. None of those
projects supply only a single installer, downloaded from an external
company's pages.

Would anybody think it acceptable if the training link on the home page
of postgresql.org went straight to 2ndQuadrant.com? (etc). What if I
gave away course material for a few, but not all of our courses? (They
take a long time to write, after all).

--
 Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.com
 PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EDB taking over?

Dave Page-7
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Simon Riggs<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> It clearly isn't the same as Linux, Apache or FreeBSD. None of those
> projects supply only a single installer, downloaded from an external
> company's pages.

Virtually all PostgreSQL packages come from a third party site. Here's
a few from our download pages:

http://www.freebsd.org/ports
http://yum.pgsqlrpms.org/
http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=postgresql&searchon=names&suite=stable&section=all
http://www.gentoo.org/
http://software.opensuse.org/search
http://www.ubuntu.com/
http://pdb.finkproject.org/pdb/browse.php?summary=postgresql
http://www.macports.org/ports.php?by=name&substr=postgresql

In fact, the only ones that we do link to downloads for on
postgresql.org, are the Solaris binaries and source code.


--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK:   http://www.enterprisedb.com

--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EDB taking over?

Simon Riggs
In reply to this post by Marc G. Fournier
Thank you for your response.

On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 21:08 -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:

> On Tue, 7 Jul 2009, Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> > We should either
> > i) remove it
> > ii) auction/openly charge for the advertising space
> > iii) have a credits or sponsors list
>
> First, I agree with many points of this thread, but I do want to point out
> that like *alot* of companies out there (CMD, EnterpriseDB, Redhat), they
> have already sunk a huge amount of money into personnel that are working
> directly on the code ...

For which they have been thanked in the normal way. Presumably no
additional thanks required then?

> The OneClick Installer is one of EDB's most *visible* contribution ...
> there is nothing stopping someone else with duplicating that effort, but I
> doubt that will happen ...

> As Dave mentions, EDB employs *several* ppl that work on that installer,
> which is not small contribution in terms of both man hours *and* monetary
> value ...

I think we should realise that they needed to write an installer anyway,
for their pay-for products.

> We have several places on the web site were we acknowledge other
> contributions ... if anything is missing from the installer (and I don't
> know that it is), it would be some sort of link *to* the list of Project
> Contributors in a prominent way .. but as the installer itself is their
> contribution, "charging for advertising space" on it doesn't quite seem
> reasonable, unless, of course, EDB wanted to charge for the advertising
> space to offset the budget they put into developing and maintaining it?

It seems it is a question of ownership. Are the installers the property
of the PostgreSQL Project or an external company?

If the installers are the property of the PostgreSQL Project then
certain constraints need to be imposed.

If the installers are property of an external company then they can do
whatever they like. But we can still control whether or not we link to
them.

In the past the PostgreSQL Project had its own installers that were
maintained by volunteer contributors. When was it announced that there
would be no Windows installer in this release and that we would rely on
an external company to produce it instead? When did we put that piece of
work out to public tender?

If we're short of money and need to raise some to fund a skill shortage
or because we have insufficient volunteers, then why not sell
advertising on the installer? If we don't like the idea of general
advertising, why is having just one advertiser acceptable?

If the project is accepting contributions from external companies with
strings attached then there should be some oversight, control and
guidance of that. Even if there is only one viable bidder.

If nobody is monitoring what goes into the installer, what is to stop
the external company requiring registrations prior to download? Or
charging for it? Or tracking people's information? Who has vetted the
privacy policy of the external company? Have we a legal agreement that
says these things will not change?  What is the difference between a
respected, benevolent company such as IBM having patents in our code and
another benevolent company having a monopoly on our installers? What if
a non-nice company bought the nice company and then started exerting
leverage?

If there are no controls on what can be included with the software, what
is to stop Mammoth replicator being put on the Download page? Mammoth is
just PostgreSQL, plus some additional items. Why does it make a
difference whether those additional items are splash screens (OK) or
changes to installation directories (OK) or useful additional production
software (apparently not OK)? Why are some "value adds" allowed and
others not? Note that EDB Advanced Server already *is* on the download
page, since we link externally. So why not put EDB Advanced Server and
all the other variants on the postgresql.org download page and be done?
That seems like the pragmatic response.

--
 Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.com
 PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EDB taking over?

Alvaro Herrera-7
In reply to this post by Andreas Pflug
Andreas Pflug wrote:

> But there's also the aspect that the postgres download page for Windows,
> Linux and MacOSX will redirect to an EDB page, which really was the
> first thing that irritated me (forgot to mention). Why is that so, why
> not a postgres page? Do we want/need  EDB to officially host postgres
> stuff, esp with PostgreSQL listed as one of EDB's featured products?

Right.  We have a working mirror system.  Why aren't the one-click
packages hosted there?

--
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EDB taking over?

Andreas Pflug
Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> Andreas Pflug wrote:
>
>  
>> But there's also the aspect that the postgres download page for Windows,
>> Linux and MacOSX will redirect to an EDB page, which really was the
>> first thing that irritated me (forgot to mention). Why is that so, why
>> not a postgres page? Do we want/need  EDB to officially host postgres
>> stuff, esp with PostgreSQL listed as one of EDB's featured products?
>>    
>
> Right.  We have a working mirror system.  Why aren't the one-click
> packages hosted there?
>  

From an EDB point of view, the answer is simple: it generates a lot of
traffic on a page advertising their products. Imagine you'd have to buy
this traffic with adwords...


Regards,
Andreas

--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EDB taking over?

Dave Page-7
In reply to this post by Alvaro Herrera-7
On 7/8/09, Alvaro Herrera <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Andreas Pflug wrote:
>
>> But there's also the aspect that the postgres download page for Windows,
>> Linux and MacOSX will redirect to an EDB page, which really was the
>> first thing that irritated me (forgot to mention). Why is that so, why
>> not a postgres page? Do we want/need  EDB to officially host postgres
>> stuff, esp with PostgreSQL listed as one of EDB's featured products?
>
> Right.  We have a working mirror system.  Why aren't the one-click
> packages hosted there?

Because, when we first discussed the one-click installers with
community members at pgcon last year, a number of ppl said they felt
the downloads should remain on our site so it was blatantly clear
where they came from.

Thus, we invested in Akamai services to host the downloads at the best
possible speed for users, allowing them to avoid choosing from a list
of mirrors with un-predictable connectivity speeds.



--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK:   http://www.enterprisedb.com

--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EDB taking over?

Alvaro Herrera-7
Dave Page wrote:

> On 7/8/09, Alvaro Herrera <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Andreas Pflug wrote:
> >
> >> But there's also the aspect that the postgres download page for Windows,
> >> Linux and MacOSX will redirect to an EDB page, which really was the
> >> first thing that irritated me (forgot to mention). Why is that so, why
> >> not a postgres page? Do we want/need  EDB to officially host postgres
> >> stuff, esp with PostgreSQL listed as one of EDB's featured products?
> >
> > Right.  We have a working mirror system.  Why aren't the one-click
> > packages hosted there?
>
> Because, when we first discussed the one-click installers with
> community members at pgcon last year, a number of ppl said they felt
> the downloads should remain on our site so it was blatantly clear
> where they came from.

Yeah, but that was when we still had the MSI installer which was the
main Windows installer.  Now the situation is completely different.
There was no warning whatsoever that that installer was going to
disappear.

--
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

New binary installer logo

Bruce Momjian
In reply to this post by Dave Page-7
Dave Page wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Andreas Pflug<[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I wonder how many non-EDB contributors have seen the One-Click
> > installer; I never used it until 8.4. I was quite irritated how
> > prominently the EnterpriseDB lettering is placed on the installer; apart
> > from a tiny "Packaged by" the graphics is a pgsql Elephant with a big
> > "EnterpriseDB(tm)" on top, with no PostgreSQL lettering around. From the
> > installer's appearance, you could get the impression EDB is the company
> > behind postgres.
>
> EDB *is* the company behind those installers. We have a number of
> people working on them, between two and three working full time in the
> lead up to 8.4 on testing and development.
>
> The logo is a large elephant logo, which is probably 3 times the size
> of the 'packaged by edb' logo. It is shown on 2 of the 9 installer
> screens.
>
> The splash screen shown by the installer at startup is based on the
> blue gradient website banner, containing the elephant, and 'world's
> most advanced open source database' tagline, with no EDB logo or text
> etc. at all.

The problem is that EDB's logo contains their name, while the PostgreSQL
elephant doesn't, so having only the two logos isn't even.  What Dave
suggested and my son Matthew implemented is a new installer logo, moving
the Postgres elephant logo to the top and adding the "PostgreSQL" name,
and moving the EnterpriseDB logo to the bottom.  Here is the result,
which will appear in the next version of the installer:

        http://momjian.us/expire/logo.png

--
  Bruce Momjian  <[hidden email]>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EDB taking over?

Rainer Bauer
In reply to this post by Dave Page-7
Dave Page wrote:

>Thus, we invested in Akamai services to host the downloads at the best
>possible speed for users, allowing them to avoid choosing from a list
>of mirrors with un-predictable connectivity speeds.

Well maybe you should check your investment. I just downloaded the zip
installer
<http://downloads.enterprisedb.com/postgresql/postgresql-8.4.0-1-windows-binaries.zip>
and the D/L speed never exceeded 200KB/s. The average speed was 86KB/s. I
usually get 1,2MB/s for downloads from Microsoft (which also use Akami AFAIK).

Rainer

--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New binary installer logo

Bruce Momjian
In reply to this post by Bruce Momjian
Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Dave Page wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Andreas Pflug<[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > I wonder how many non-EDB contributors have seen the One-Click
> > > installer; I never used it until 8.4. I was quite irritated how
> > > prominently the EnterpriseDB lettering is placed on the installer; apart
> > > from a tiny "Packaged by" the graphics is a pgsql Elephant with a big
> > > "EnterpriseDB(tm)" on top, with no PostgreSQL lettering around. From the
> > > installer's appearance, you could get the impression EDB is the company
> > > behind postgres.
> >
> > EDB *is* the company behind those installers. We have a number of
> > people working on them, between two and three working full time in the
> > lead up to 8.4 on testing and development.
> >
> > The logo is a large elephant logo, which is probably 3 times the size
> > of the 'packaged by edb' logo. It is shown on 2 of the 9 installer
> > screens.
> >
> > The splash screen shown by the installer at startup is based on the
> > blue gradient website banner, containing the elephant, and 'world's
> > most advanced open source database' tagline, with no EDB logo or text
> > etc. at all.
>
> The problem is that EDB's logo contains their name, while the PostgreSQL
> elephant doesn't, so having only the two logos isn't even.  What Dave
> suggested and my son Matthew implemented is a new installer logo, moving
> the Postgres elephant logo to the top and adding the "PostgreSQL" name,
> and moving the EnterpriseDB logo to the bottom.  Here is the result,
> which will appear in the next version of the installer:
>
> http://momjian.us/expire/logo.png

A new idea --- would people like the PostgreSQL elephant logo added to
the EnterpriseDB download page:

        http://www.enterprisedb.com/products/pgdownload.do#windows

Is that helpful or harmful?

--
  Bruce Momjian  <[hidden email]>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New binary installer logo

Andreas Pflug
In reply to this post by Bruce Momjian
Bruce Momjian wrote:

>
>
> The problem is that EDB's logo contains their name, while the PostgreSQL
> elephant doesn't, so having only the two logos isn't even.  What Dave
> suggested and my son Matthew implemented is a new installer logo, moving
> the Postgres elephant logo to the top and adding the "PostgreSQL" name,
> and moving the EnterpriseDB logo to the bottom.  Here is the result,
> which will appear in the next version of the installer:
>
> http://momjian.us/expire/logo.png
>
>  
IMHO this is a good step in the right direction, but BitRock certainly
invested even more time into creating the base installer than EDB into
the pgsql specific part. BitRock doesn't present their lettering so
prominently either.

As Greg wrote:
> It's a big chunk of time they're basically sponsoring in return for
the associated PR

That's the very problem. All other contributing companies don't have the
chance to earn this PR from their contribution, so it's not really fair.

Regards,
Andreas


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New binary installer logo

Rob Napier-3
Re: [pgsql-advocacy] New binary installer logo Here’s my two bits:

At the risk of repeating myself, I see the problem lies with focusing on one specific situation rather than the wider questions. This forum often gets bogged down in specifics that eventually descend into name-calling, rather than dealing with policy. And little is ever really resolved with everyone feeling positive about the outcome.

I don’t believe that Enterprise DB (or any other developer) getting their name up in the way that this is being presented is particularly threatening in principle or in fact. I, for one, don’t take a lot of notice of logos in this context – particularly ones that are (dare I say it) as unattractive as the PostgreSQL and Enterprise DB images.

{My apologies to their respective designers but they are very 70s!}

I don’t believe they are noticed and I don’t believe they are effective. Printed names (in the text) has more pulling power through Google searches and more credibility on Wikipedia, etc. and public acknowledgement through media releases. I’d appreciate a positive comment in the media from Josh or Simon, et al. ‘that the PostgreSQL community expresses its gratitude to <insert name here> for its important contribution to the release of <insert product name here>’ than having a logo plastered on a page.

That said, there are places where a logo is appropriate and I’d be happy to pursue that discussion as part of a policy development framework.

Where there is one or more contributing sponsors, a ‘tramline’ at the bottom of the page acknowledging contributors/sponsors is more powerful (if you accept my view on the virtues of Google acknowledgements).

This scrapping is completely counter-productive and totally unnecessary. To play out these sorts of arguments in an open forum seems to my innocent view of the world: petty and counterproductive.

I would really like to see this whole issue of sponsorship and recognition drafted as a policy. I, for one, would be happy to see that this disparate band can work toward a positive outcome – just as you do with software development.

This group is supposed to be working toward advocacy. How about doing that?

Rob Napier

P.S. Josh Berkus offered feedback on the brochure concept. It is almost ready to go to print. I assume ‘no comment’ means everyone approved.

On 9/7/09 9:16 AM, "Andreas Pflug" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>
>>
>> The problem is that EDB's logo contains their name, while the PostgreSQL
>> elephant doesn't, so having only the two logos isn't even.  What Dave
>> suggested and my son Matthew implemented is a new installer logo, moving
>> the Postgres elephant logo to the top and adding the "PostgreSQL" name,
>> and moving the EnterpriseDB logo to the bottom.  Here is the result,
>> which will appear in the next version of the installer:
>>
>> http://momjian.us/expire/logo.png
>>
>>   
> IMHO this is a good step in the right direction, but BitRock certainly
> invested even more time into creating the base installer than EDB into
> the pgsql specific part. BitRock doesn't present their lettering so
> prominently either.
>
> As Greg wrote:
123