Re: Who's a "Corporate Sponsor"?

From: Robert Bernier <robert(dot)bernier5(at)sympatico(dot)ca>
To: josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Who's a "Corporate Sponsor"?
Date: 2004-12-03 19:18:43
Message-ID: 200412031418.43416.robert.bernier5@sympatico.ca
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

On December 3, 2004 02:15 pm, Josh Berkus wrote:
> So the developers of phpPgAdmin don't count? And JDBC? And Slony? and
> PostGIS? and eRServer? Do I make my point here? How does is benefit
> PostgreSQL to exclude so many?
>
> Given that over the next few years we can expect to put an increasing
> amount of code into "add-ins" and less and less code into the core, I think
> not listing optional add-in contributors would be very short-sighted.
> *especially* since it's Core, NOT the contributors, who gets to decide
> what's in the main code and what's not.

Maybe we should acknowledge corporate contribution period. The challenge is to
arrive at a standard that everyone can agree.

In response to

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marc G. Fournier 2004-12-03 19:20:49 Re: Who's a "Corporate Sponsor"?
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2004-12-03 19:17:47 Re: Who's a "Corporate Sponsor"?