Well, its not as if we're being given much of a choice is it. With Oracle being essentially 'deprecated' there isn't any future for it here.
I think I addressed contribution. If Oracle users are not introducing changes or bugs then why do they have to develop the oracle equivalent for those who do so for PG?
I think its the same situation we had a few years ago around testing. Developers who make changes should also submit sufficient tests. Why is it someone elses resposibility simply because the developer 'doesn't want to do testing'?
Same for documentation. Doc quality is low because people intoduce new features, but expect someone else to communicate it for them.
Even if there were more oracle contributors doing 'other peoples jobs' then unless you have a pretty much even number of both sides then one will always be playing catch up. the rate of submission will always be controlled by the larger community. So effectively might (or size) makes right.
The problem is not Oracle, its the attitude towards what constitutes acceptable development standards.
The rules shoudl have always been
- no code without test.
- no query without both databases.
- no functions without user documents/guides.
This community could learn a lot from XP.
