I think it is part of the incentive for corporations to contribute - not
just an impressive list for PHB. It's nice to get the recognition for
their time/money contributions and a good way for the PGDG to show their
appreciation.
-r
On Thu, 2003-11-06 at 14:34, Josh Berkus wrote:
Peter,
I
Imagine this discussion with your boss:
You: I want to spend an hour a day at work on PostgreSQL
community work.
Boss: Hmm. (How do I justify this?)
You: Our company will be listed on the main PostgreSQL web
site.
Boss: Fine. (That
Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 09:08:57PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I think that list is a pretty dumb idea in the first place. We have a
list of developers with company names next to them. Let readers make
their own recognition evaluation.
I'm not sure that's
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 09:57:12PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
True, but for that you're looking at the wrong list. This is the list of
contributors, not of users.
I tend to agree with that. Maybe the trick is to talk about
featured users or something? I dunno, I keep trying to keep the
Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 09:57:12PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
True, but for that you're looking at the wrong list. This is the list of
contributors, not of users.
I tend to agree with that. Maybe the trick is to talk about
featured users or something? I
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:24:04AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Maybe a developer of the month feature. :-)
It would be quite cool if, say, General Bits could ocassionaly carry an
interview with a Postgres developer.
(Now that would be a mess to translate)
--
Alvaro Herrera
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 09:12:50AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
You: I want to spend an hour a day at work on PostgreSQL
community work.
Boss: Hmm. (How do I justify this?)
You: Our company will be listed on the main PostgreSQL web
site.
Alvaro,
That'd be cool for me, but what 'main PostgreSQL web site' are you
talking about? Is this www.postgresql.org? Or advocacy.postgresql.org?
Or maybe it'd be developer.postgresql.org?
I think everyone agrees with the idea of unifying www, advocacy, and
developer. Techdocs and Gborg
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:17:12AM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
Alvaro,
That'd be cool for me, but what 'main PostgreSQL web site' are you
talking about? Is this www.postgresql.org? Or advocacy.postgresql.org?
Or maybe it'd be developer.postgresql.org?
I think everyone agrees with the
-Original Message-
From: Alvaro Herrera [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 07 November 2003 17:37
To: Bruce Momjian
Cc: Peter Eisentraut; Josh Berkus;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Changes to Contributor List
I really think
Josh Berkus writes:
I was discussing specifically the Recognized Corporate Contributors which
is, AFAIK, strictly a PHB thing, no?
No.
Please explain.
I don't see anything in this project that should be strictly a PHB thing,
the exception maybe being the weird whitepaper someone is
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think that list is a pretty dumb idea in the first place. We have a
list of developers with company names next to them. Let readers make
their own recognition evaluation.
That works if you think that the only form of corporate support is
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 09:08:57PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I think that list is a pretty dumb idea in the first place. We have a
list of developers with company names next to them. Let readers make
their own recognition evaluation.
I'm not sure that's all it's for. Every time we
Hello,
My feeling is that advocacy should be just that: Advocacy.
It doesn't matter who the intended audience is in reality. However,
it is also important to remember that technical experts typically
don't need to be sold on PostgreSQL.
PHBs on the other hand probably do and thus much of our
Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 09:08:57PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I think that list is a pretty dumb idea in the first place. We have a
list of developers with company names next to them. Let readers make
their own recognition evaluation.
Your assuming that
Peter,
Right now, the list is nothing more than a
marketing tool for the listed companies for attracting existing users to
them.
Yes? That's exactly the intention -- so that existing users and interested
parties can see the companies that give major resources to the project.
This has a
Andrew Sullivan writes:
I'm not sure that's all it's for. Every time we talk about using
Postgres, people want to know who else uses it.
True, but for that you're looking at the wrong list. This is the list of
contributors, not of users.
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Josh Berkus writes:
Yes? That's exactly the intention -- so that existing users and interested
parties can see the companies that give major resources to the project.
Yes, but existing users and most interested parties don't fall into the
PHB category, nor do most PHB's fall into the
Peter,
Hence my original point: the list of supporting companies
does not primarily belong in the advocacy realm.
But it does! You pointed it out yourself for the hackers OSS tech
people, they can just look at the descriptions of the major contributors and
figure things out for
Josh Berkus writes:
But it does! You pointed it out yourself for the hackers OSS tech
people, they can just look at the descriptions of the major contributors and
figure things out for themselves. They don't need a list with company logos
links.
Other people have pointed out that
20 matches
Mail list logo
