Horton

Thread

  1. Re: Changes to Contributor List

    Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> — 2003-11-06T01:19:15Z

    Peter,
 
> http://advocacy.postgresql.org/about/
> 
> This is sort of the same web page that we're talking about here, but it
> lists the developers below the press contacts as also-rans.  What's worse,
> this is the web page that people will get to if they go to if they go to
> http://www.postgresql.org and click on the first link they see: "What
> is...".  

??? I thought we fixed that link.

> Don't get me wrong, press contacts and advocacy team deserve
> recognition as well, but not on a page that is indirectly labelled "What
> is PostgreSQL".  It makes it look like the project is run by marketing
> dudes.

Yeah, you're right,it's confusing .... we should have two seperate pages, one 
for "What is the PGDG" possibly linking to developer., and one page for 
"Contact Us".   As it is, they two are munged together.

The problem is getting it fixed before 7.4 .... there are 7 translations ....

-- 
-Josh Berkus
 Aglio Database Solutions
 San Francisco

  2. Re: Changes to Contributor List

    Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> — 2003-11-06T10:26:58Z

    Josh Berkus writes:

> Yeah, you're right,it's confusing .... we should have two seperate pages, one
> for "What is the PGDG" possibly linking to developer., and one page for
> "Contact Us".   As it is, they two are munged together.

Btw., what process is used to determine which organizations become a
"recognised contributor"?

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net

  3. Re: Changes to Contributor List

    Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> — 2003-11-06T16:48:01Z

    Peter,

> Btw., what process is used to determine which organizations become a
> "recognised contributor"?

Yeah, that's another "ToDo" item ... your company needs to go up there.

Criteria are major code contributions and/or sponsoring a full-time developer.  
We've discussed it on -CORE some, but not come to a specific determination of 
the level required.   However, between you & M &  LinuxWorld etc. your 
company definitely qualifies.

And if we're gonna continue this thread, we should move it to -Advocacy.

-- 
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

  4. Re: Changes to Contributor List

    Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> — 2003-11-06T17:39:11Z

    Josh Berkus writes:

> And if we're gonna continue this thread, we should move it to -Advocacy.

I'm a bit lost here.

It was recently said very clearly, "The target audience of the advocacy
site is PHB's, not technical people."  And the content of the site
supports that in my mind.  Yet, the advocacy group keeps absorbing more
and more tasks that are not strictly related to development, but are
clearly not targeting PHB's exclusively either.  There is a wide spectrum
between the PostgreSQL guru on the one side and the PHB on the other side.
(And the middle of the spectrum happens to be the largest part.) Those are
the people I see coming to presentations, expositions, those are the
people I am targeting when I'm making flyers, write books and magazine
articles, prepare training classes.  Those are the people who actually
come to our web site in search of information.  Those are the people who
will like to read a nice press release that is not a bare change log but
still free of marketing BS.  But nobody's addressing those people.

So please, declare your intentions and make them consistent with your
actions.

Until then, or in any case, the discussion list of the development group
is the right place to discuss who gets to be a recognized contributor of
that same development group.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net

  5. Re: Changes to Contributor List

    Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> — 2003-11-06T18:54:47Z

    Peter,

> I'm a bit lost here.

I was discussing specifically the "Recognized Corporate Contributors" which 
is, AFAIK, strictly a PHB thing, no?

-- 
-Josh Berkus
 Aglio Database Solutions
 San Francisco

  6. Re: Changes to Contributor List

    Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> — 2003-11-06T19:30:28Z

    Josh Berkus writes:

> I was discussing specifically the "Recognized Corporate Contributors" which
> is, AFAIK, strictly a PHB thing, no?

No.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net

  7. Re: Changes to Contributor List

    Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> — 2003-11-06T19:34:56Z

    Peter,

> > I was discussing specifically the "Recognized Corporate Contributors" 
which
> > is, AFAIK, strictly a PHB thing, no?
> 
> No.

Please explain.

-- 
-Josh Berkus
 Aglio Database Solutions
 San Francisco

  8. Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Changes to Contributor List

    Ryan Mahoney <ryan@paymentalliance.net> — 2003-11-06T19:47:57Z

    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 was discussing specifically the "Recognized Corporate Contributors" 
> which
> > > is, AFAIK, strictly a PHB thing, no?
> > 
> > No.
> 
> Please explain.
-- 
Ryan Mahoney <ryan@paymentalliance.net>

  9. Re: Changes to Contributor List

    Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> — 2003-11-06T20:08:57Z

    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 going to write
sometime.  Anything else is intended for a greatly diverse audience, who
may be engineers or decision makers, who may be technically incompetent,
technically open-minded, or technical experts, and who may or may not have
varying degrees of clues about open source, databases, and PostgreSQL.
In other words, the general public.  If you disagree, then maybe we should
split up into advocacy-for-phbs and advocacy-for-real-people groups.

Moreover, you seem to imply that the list of companies should primarily be
a marketing instrument of the PostgreSQL project for attracting new users.
I don't understand that.  I would understand it if the list contained a
large number of "big names", but it does not, and it is not set up to
strive for that goal.  Right now, the list is nothing more than a
marketing tool for the listed companies for attracting existing users to
them.

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.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net

  10. Re: [HACKERS] Changes to Contributor List

    Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2003-11-06T20:17:27Z

    Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> 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
sponsoring a developer.  Seems to me that's a bit narrow-minded.
For instance, hub.org is contributing (by providing hosting services)
way more than you might think from the number of times it appears on
the developer list...

			regards, tom lane

  11. Re: [HACKERS] Changes to Contributor List

    Andrew Sullivan <andrew@libertyrms.info> — 2003-11-06T20:20:43Z

    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 talk about using
Postgres, people want to know who else uses it.  It's really strange,
but for some reason, people seem to believe that a product isn't any
good unless a large number of people are already using it, and that
it _is_ good if a large number of people do use it.  (I guess the idea
is that all those Windows users can't be wrong.  Oh, wait. . .)

A

-- 
----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew@libertyrms.info>                              M2P 2A8
                                         +1 416 646 3304 x110

  12. Re: [HACKERS] Changes to Contributor List

    Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> — 2003-11-06T20:24:16Z

    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
Advocacy work should be geared towards them. I believe
one place where we are particularly week is PostgreSQL
versus MySQL.

   We should have mountains of dead tree printables on why
you should use PostgreSQL and why you shouldn't use mySQL.
This can be done in a non-flammatory way.

Sincerely,

Joshua Drake


Peter Eisentraut wrote:

>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 going to write
>sometime.  Anything else is intended for a greatly diverse audience, who
>may be engineers or decision makers, who may be technically incompetent,
>technically open-minded, or technical experts, and who may or may not have
>varying degrees of clues about open source, databases, and PostgreSQL.
>In other words, the general public.  If you disagree, then maybe we should
>split up into advocacy-for-phbs and advocacy-for-real-people groups.
>
>Moreover, you seem to imply that the list of companies should primarily be
>a marketing instrument of the PostgreSQL project for attracting new users.
>I don't understand that.  I would understand it if the list contained a
>large number of "big names", but it does not, and it is not set up to
>strive for that goal.  Right now, the list is nothing more than a
>marketing tool for the listed companies for attracting existing users to
>them.
>
>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.
>
>  
>

-- 
Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC
Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-222-2783 - jd@commandprompt.com - http://www.commandprompt.com
Editor-N-Chief - PostgreSQl.Org - http://www.postgresql.org

  13. Re: Changes to Contributor List

    Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> — 2003-11-06T20:27:03Z

    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 dual purpose: it both provides free advertising for the companies 
as a tit-for-tat, and shows potential adopters that PostgreSQL is not 100% 
hobby developers coding in their free time.

> 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.

You seem pretty opposed to the corporate list given that one of your 
co-workers just requested to be on it.

To paraphrase one of my friends who works for an ad agency:  "Peter, we're not 
advertising to YOU."    That page is not there for you or for people like 
you.  It is there for IT department managers, PHBs, people considering 
PostgreSQL, and people looking for high-end paid support.

-- 
-Josh Berkus
 Aglio Database Solutions
 San Francisco

  14. Re: [HACKERS] Changes to Contributor List

    Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> — 2003-11-06T20:29:19Z

    
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 people are intelligent. In general they are not. In 
general
people want to see that Cisco, Afilias, RedHat, ACS etc... use PostgreSQL.
They want graphics, they want teddy bears.

J



>
>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.  It's really strange,
>but for some reason, people seem to believe that a product isn't any
>good unless a large number of people are already using it, and that
>it _is_ good if a large number of people do use it.  (I guess the idea
>is that all those Windows users can't be wrong.  Oh, wait. . .)
>
>A
>
>  
>

-- 
Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC
Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-222-2783 - jd@commandprompt.com - http://www.commandprompt.com
Editor-N-Chief - PostgreSQl.Org - http://www.postgresql.org

  15. Re: [HACKERS] Changes to Contributor List

    Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> — 2003-11-06T20:51:57Z

    *This* we can move to -advocacy. :-)

Joshua D. Drake writes:

> it is also important to remember that technical experts typically
> don't need to be sold on PostgreSQL.

I think this assumption is flawed.  For example, I think it'd be fair to
consider myself a technical expert who is informed about open source.
Yet, here are some things you would realy need to sell me on:

Debian
GNOME
vi
OpenOffice
Python
Interbase

(Please don't, I'm happy with what I have. :-) )

And that is just one case, not covering the varying degrees between
"expert", "aware", and "ignorant".

At the expo last week, we had over a hundred visitors, of which none were
PHBs, only a handful were relatively ignorant, but over half of the crowd
wanted to be "sold" in one way or another.

With those people, "selling" is more likely to be fruitful and rewarding.
But it needs to be done.

>    We should have mountains of dead tree printables on why
> you should use PostgreSQL and why you shouldn't use mySQL.
> This can be done in a non-flammatory way.

I think the very fact that you'd do it would be interpreted negatively by
many people.  I talked to some other major projects at the expo who have
obvious opponents.  They make it a policy not to do direct comparisons,
out of respect and decency.  That's tough, but I think it's the way to go.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net

  16. Re: [HACKERS] Changes to Contributor List

    Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> — 2003-11-06T20:56:07Z

    Guys,

> >    We should have mountains of dead tree printables on why
> > you should use PostgreSQL and why you shouldn't use mySQL.
> > This can be done in a non-flammatory way.
> 
> I think the very fact that you'd do it would be interpreted negatively by
> many people.  I talked to some other major projects at the expo who have
> obvious opponents.  They make it a policy not to do direct comparisons,
> out of respect and decency.  That's tough, but I think it's the way to go.

I for one think that we should do comparisons with *all* major databases, not 
just MySQL.  In fact, maybe we should start with Oracle, DB2, or (my 
favorite) MS SQL Server first.   Go where the money is, y'know?

Especially since most of (certainly not all of) the MySQL people have been 
trying to patch things up lately.

-- 
-Josh Berkus
 Aglio Database Solutions
 San Francisco

  17. Re: [HACKERS] Changes to Contributor List

    Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> — 2003-11-06T20:57:12Z

    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   peter_e@gmx.net

  18. Re: Changes to Contributor List

    Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> — 2003-11-06T21:06:41Z

    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 existing users or interested
parties category, nor do most existing users fall into the group that one
advocates to.  Hence my original point: the list of supporting companies
does not primarily belong in the advocacy realm.

> You seem pretty opposed to the corporate list given that one of your
> co-workers just requested to be on it.

Well, if there must be a list, then why not be on it? :-)

> It is there for IT department managers, PHBs, people considering
> PostgreSQL, and people looking for high-end paid support.

Great, that's exactly what I wanted to hear.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net

  19. Re: Changes to Contributor List

    Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> — 2003-11-06T21:20:07Z

    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 themselves.   They don't need a list with company logos 
& links.

This is important because we've (people on the Advocacy list) briefly 
discussed expanding this page to cover companies which, in the future, make 
*financial* contributions to PostgreSQL ... sort of a "corporate donors" 
page.   This works very well in standard nonprofit fundraising; the project 
gets $, and the donors get publicity.  Obviously, contributors would have to 
be categorized, but that's an issue for when we're ready to set it up.

> > It is there for IT department managers, PHBs, people considering
> > PostgreSQL, and people looking for high-end paid support.
> 
> Great, that's exactly what I wanted to hear.

I can't tell over e-mail whether you're agreeing with me or being sarcastic.  
Clue?

-- 
-Josh Berkus
 Aglio Database Solutions
 San Francisco

  20. Re: Changes to Contributor List

    Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> — 2003-11-06T22:15:57Z

    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 this is not really sufficient.  So if
there is to be a separate company list, then it should be next to the
individuals list.

> This is important because we've (people on the Advocacy list) briefly
> discussed expanding this page to cover companies which, in the future, make
> *financial* contributions to PostgreSQL ... sort of a "corporate donors"
> page.   This works very well in standard nonprofit fundraising; the project
> gets $, and the donors get publicity.  Obviously, contributors would have to
> be categorized, but that's an issue for when we're ready to set it up.

When we're ready.  But we're not.

But then again, this sort of list would mostly be of use to existing
users, in the sense, "They support a project I like, so I like them."
You could only really make use of that for attracting potential users if
you could make a clear case the the amount of donations is sufficient to
guarantee any kind of longevity of the project.  I think that will be hard
to do (because there is, in fact, absolutely no relation).  But hopefully,
by the time we've arrived there, this silly web site fragmentation will be
over and this question will be moot.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net

  21. Re: [HACKERS] Changes to Contributor List

    Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> — 2003-11-07T13:43:34Z

    Josh Berkus wrote:
> Peter,
> 
> > Btw., what process is used to determine which organizations become a
> > "recognised contributor"?
> 
> Yeah, that's another "ToDo" item ... your company needs to go up there.
> 
> Criteria are major code contributions and/or sponsoring a full-time developer.  
> We've discussed it on -CORE some, but not come to a specific determination of 
> the level required.   However, between you & M &  LinuxWorld etc. your 
> company definitely qualifies.

I don't think the developers have to be full-time, like me and Tom.  Any
company that consistently contributes developer time for items other
than "we need a feature" should be listed, I think.  Peter, for example,
isn't full-time PostgreSQL, but is contributing greatly, and Command
Prompt has offered to contribute a developer toward Win32 --- I am
seeing more and more of these folks coming around, and it is beefing up
our development team.  We can help these companies also by providing
speaking and trade show opportunities.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

  22. Re: Changes to Contributor List

    Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> — 2003-11-07T14:12:50Z

    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 gives me a legitimate business purpose.)

This is why listing companies/individuals is good for several reasons,
and this is one of them.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> 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 this is not really sufficient.  So if
> there is to be a separate company list, then it should be next to the
> individuals list.
> 
> > This is important because we've (people on the Advocacy list) briefly
> > discussed expanding this page to cover companies which, in the future, make
> > *financial* contributions to PostgreSQL ... sort of a "corporate donors"
> > page.   This works very well in standard nonprofit fundraising; the project
> > gets $, and the donors get publicity.  Obviously, contributors would have to
> > be categorized, but that's an issue for when we're ready to set it up.
> 
> When we're ready.  But we're not.
> 
> But then again, this sort of list would mostly be of use to existing
> users, in the sense, "They support a project I like, so I like them."
> You could only really make use of that for attracting potential users if
> you could make a clear case the the amount of donations is sufficient to
> guarantee any kind of longevity of the project.  I think that will be hard
> to do (because there is, in fact, absolutely no relation).  But hopefully,
> by the time we've arrived there, this silly web site fragmentation will be
> over and this question will be moot.
> 
> -- 
> Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net
> 
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org
> 

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

  23. Re: [HACKERS] Changes to Contributor List

    Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> — 2003-11-07T14:21:12Z

    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 all it's for.  Every time we talk about using
> Postgres, people want to know who else uses it.  It's really strange,
> but for some reason, people seem to believe that a product isn't any
> good unless a large number of people are already using it, and that
> it _is_ good if a large number of people do use it.  (I guess the idea
> is that all those Windows users can't be wrong.  Oh, wait. . .)

You have heard the term "first adopters".  These people want to be
second adopters.  :-)

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

  24. Re: [HACKERS] Changes to Contributor List

    Andrew Sullivan <andrew@libertyrms.info> — 2003-11-07T14:29:46Z

    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
points off my hair.

A

-- 
----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew@libertyrms.info>                              M2P 2A8
                                         +1 416 646 3304 x110

  25. Re: [HACKERS] Changes to Contributor List

    Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> — 2003-11-07T15:24:04Z

    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 dunno, I keep trying to keep the
> points off my hair.

Maybe a "developer of the month" feature.  :-)

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

  26. Re: [HACKERS] Changes to Contributor List

    Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@dcc.uchile.cl> — 2003-11-07T15:44:01Z

    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 (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"Linux transformó mi computadora, de una `máquina para hacer cosas',
en un aparato realmente entretenido, sobre el cual cada día aprendo
algo nuevo" (Jaime Salinas)

  27. Re: [HACKERS] Changes to Contributor List

    Chris Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org> — 2003-11-07T16:12:28Z

    After a long battle with technology,alvherre@dcc.uchile.cl (Alvaro Herrera), an earthling, wrote:
> 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)

_I_ think that some inquiries should be made back and forth between
some combination of [Core Guys] and [Linux Magazine] for an interview.

There have lately been conspicuous interviews in LM with 'high ranking
folks' associated with such notable systems as:

 - XFree86 (various participants)
 - Linux 2.6 (Andrew Morton)
 - Beowulf (various participants)
 - Perl (Damien Conway)
 - That other database system :-)

A discussion that drew in several of the PG "Core" would likely make
good reading, and a goodly attraction of interest.
-- 
wm(X,Y):-write(X),write('@'),write(Y). wm('cbbrowne','ntlug.org').
http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/advocacy.html
Rules of the Evil Overlord #172. "I will allow guards to operate under
a flexible  work schedule. That way  if one is feeling  sleepy, he can
call for a replacement, punch out, take a nap, and come back refreshed
and alert to finish out his shift. <http://www.eviloverlord.com/>

  28. PHB?

    Anastasios Hatzis <ahatzis@ithcorp.com> — 2003-11-07T16:26:18Z

    Uhm, what does 'PHB' mean?

Anastasios

  29. Re: PHB?

    Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> — 2003-11-07T16:49:22Z

    Anastasios Hatzis wrote:
> Uhm, what does 'PHB' mean?

Pointy-haired boss, from the Dilbert comic strip.  It is a boss who
doesn't understand technology, but thinks he does and manages you
accordingly.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

  30. Re: Changes to Contributor List

    Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@dcc.uchile.cl> — 2003-11-07T17:36:59Z

    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.
> 	Boss: Fine.  (That gives me a legitimate business purpose.)

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 really think they should be unified.  Any developer here really thinks
that developer things _have_ to be apart?

-- 
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"No hay hombre que no aspire a la plenitud, es decir,
la suma de experiencias de que un hombre es capaz"

  31. Re: Changes to Contributor List

    Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> — 2003-11-07T18:17:12Z

    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 will stay seperate becuase they're based on 
different technology.

-- 
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

  32. Re: Changes to Contributor List

    Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@dcc.uchile.cl> — 2003-11-07T18:36:46Z

    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 idea of unifying www, advocacy, and 
> developer.  Techdocs and Gborg will stay seperate becuase they're based on 
> different technology.

Cool.  I thought I had understand otherwise on a mail from Robert Treat.
Sorry for the confusion.

-- 
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"La rebeldía es la virtud original del hombre" (Arthur Schopenhauer)

  33. Re: [HACKERS] Changes to Contributor List

    Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> — 2003-11-07T18:42:15Z

    Guys,

> _I_ think that some inquiries should be made back and forth between
> some combination of [Core Guys] and [Linux Magazine] for an interview.

I can set this up if you want; I already write for LM  (Josh D., sorry for 
jumping in).   Actually, the holdup is finding a good interviewer; I suck at 
taking interviews.   I'll see if Martin has anyone.

Volunteers for interviewees?

-- 
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

  34. Re: [HACKERS] Changes to Contributor List

    Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> — 2003-11-07T18:57:21Z

    Josh Berkus writes:

> I for one think that we should do comparisons with *all* major databases, not
> just MySQL.  In fact, maybe we should start with Oracle, DB2, or (my
> favorite) MS SQL Server first.   Go where the money is, y'know?

Certainly, gathering that information in a central place would be
beneficial.  But we should be careful about the following possibilities:

1. Basing a marketing strategy on "we are better than X" rather than "we
will solve your problems because" is dangerous in multiple dimensions.
So, make this information available on the side, but don't rub it into
people's faces.

2. There is a real risk that we will come out badly compared to some
candidates, when you consider their full feature set.

2.a. If you don't consider their full feature set, your analysis will be
rejected as biases or ignorant.

3. You might get into legal trouble.

So, in the first round I would treat these documents as quasi-internal,
serving as references of information for preparing other material or, say,
preparing for tough questions at a presentation, but not as flyer type
material.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net

  35. Re: [HACKERS] Changes to Contributor List

    Chris Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org> — 2003-11-07T20:36:55Z

    Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing whenjosh@agliodbs.com (Josh Berkus)wrote:
> Guys,
>
>> _I_ think that some inquiries should be made back and forth between
>> some combination of [Core Guys] and [Linux Magazine] for an interview.
>
> I can set this up if you want; I already write for LM  (Josh D., sorry for 
> jumping in).   Actually, the holdup is finding a good interviewer; I suck at 
> taking interviews.   I'll see if Martin has anyone.
>
> Volunteers for interviewees?

And note that it is well worth reviewing previous LM articles of this
sort such as the one on "That Other Database."

A GOOD interview would certainly _not_ be a response to that article,
but rather do the same thing that article does, which is to present
the interesting things about the project.
-- 
let name="cbbrowne" and tld="acm.org" in String.concat "@" [name;tld];;
http://cbbrowne.com/info/spreadsheets.html
Never criticize anybody until  you have walked  a mile in their shoes,
because by that time you will be a mile away and have their shoes.
-- email sig, Brian Servis