Dann,
> From a growth standpoint, I think it is a much better idea to focus on
> their strong points. Look at the things each competitor can do best.
> Try to think of ways to get the same functionality from PostgreSQL. If
> it is impossible [or currently infeasible] to meet the functionality,
> then close the gap.
You are, of course, correct. We will have to prioritize which "gaps" mean
the most to us. For example, if I was to make a "top six list":
-- Lack of comprehensive GUI admin tools
-- Lack of replication and point in time recovery
-- PL/pgSQL does not 100% replace PL/SQL or T-SQL Stored Procedures
-- Miscellaneous speed/optimization issues
-- Need good GUI installer, including installer for Postgres+PHP+Apache
-- Win32 Port
But what order would we want to tackle these in? For that matter, don't
forget about Postgres goals to acheive features that nobody else has:
-- 98% SQL-99 Compliance, including Schema, Domain, etc.
-- 100% support of all data types and operators
-- etc.
All of this is a moot point, though. Programmers work on what they want to
work on ... so even if, say, a GUI installer is really important to *me*, it
ain't gonna get done unless I do it myself.
--
-Josh Berkus