3 ms·

But that is exactly the point - this patch isn't open source (at the moment). It's closed source and is being given to preferred "customers". If it was really o

by Narkov 14y ago

But that is exactly the point - this patch isn't open source (at the moment). It's closed source and is being given to preferred "customers". If it was really open source then we wouldn't have this problem. I'm not an expert in this field but it seems like the proper thing to do would be to announce a release date that gives everyone sufficient time to prepare and then give it to everyone.

andrewljohnson 14y ago
The patch isn't closed source - the patch is in production, and will soon be open sourced. Calling it closed source is just rhetoric. You just don't think they are moving fast enough or that there should be pragmatic reasons to give favorable treatment to any users. And so I think it's valid to say Postgres is open source, so fix it yourself if you don't want to wait for the people who are fixing it for you for free.
- Narkov 14y ago
  If it "will soon be open sourced" what is it if it's not "closed source"? Whilst it's not closed source in the traditional sense, it very much exists (there's no doubt about this) and isn't available to the general population so therefore, IMHO, is closed source. Don't get me wrong - I understand the need to stage the release however I don't agree with the priority/privileged access.
- tensor 14y ago
  And so I think it's valid to say Postgres is open source, so fix it yourself if you don't want to wait for the people who are fixing it for you for free. This is also rhetoric, not to mention damaging and insulting. You know damn well that nobody can "fix it themselves." It's not known what the problem is, let alone how to fix it. For any amount of money. It's not even about the wait time. The entire point of the embargo is that no one releases early. I initially thought this was an early release, though given that heroku uses a service model it probably isn't. The postgres team obviously cares deeply about handling this in the right way. A great many people value that, myself included.

by Narkov 14y ago

andrewljohnson 14y ago

The patch isn't closed source - the patch is in production, and will soon be open sourced. Calling it closed source is just rhetoric. You just don't think they are moving fast enough or that there should be pragmatic reasons to give favorable treatment to any users. And so I think it's valid to say Postgres is open source, so fix it yourself if you don't want to wait for the people who are fixing it for you for free.

Narkov 14y ago
If it "will soon be open sourced" what is it if it's not "closed source"? Whilst it's not closed source in the traditional sense, it very much exists (there's no doubt about this) and isn't available to the general population so therefore, IMHO, is closed source. Don't get me wrong - I understand the need to stage the release however I don't agree with the priority/privileged access.
tensor 14y ago
And so I think it's valid to say Postgres is open source, so fix it yourself if you don't want to wait for the people who are fixing it for you for free. This is also rhetoric, not to mention damaging and insulting. You know damn well that nobody can "fix it themselves." It's not known what the problem is, let alone how to fix it. For any amount of money. It's not even about the wait time. The entire point of the embargo is that no one releases early. I initially thought this was an early release, though given that heroku uses a service model it probably isn't. The postgres team obviously cares deeply about handling this in the right way. A great many people value that, myself included.