On 02/20/2013 11:26 AM, Mike Rylander wrote:
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Kathy Lussier <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
So, why have ESI involved at all? Besides the fact that we create a
significant portion of the code, and that it benefits us as much as
anyone to have a more stable Evergreen, there is a need for ongoing,
active leadership in QA. The fact is that it has not materialized yet,
so we're looking for a way to make that a maintainable proposition for
the community's benefit. That means ongoing, deep integration with both
developer and user communities. And that is not something that we can
expect from OmniTI or any other organization that is not plugged into
those communities. Could some other organization step into that role,
and provide years of ongoing QA support? Perhaps so, but ESI exists
today and has the Evergreen expertise needed to avoid long (and costly)
ramp-up time.
There are two very good reasons for people to not use a software's
origin vendor. This is not a reflection of that vendor as it is a
reflection of any software community.
1. The origin is not going to be an expert in every technology required
to run Evergreen. They are an expert *IN* their software (in this case
Evergreen) which is a very different thing.
2. An outside vendor is objective. It can look at code, architecture,
queries, models and say, "Woah... what were they (whoever they are)
thinking here?"
Sincerely,
JD
P.S. And for the record, OmniTI is a competitor of ours and I bow in
honor to their level of professionalism and expertise.
--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development
High Availability, Oracle Conversion, Postgres-XC
@cmdpromptinc - 509-416-6579
