On Fri, 3 Dec 2004, Josh Berkus wrote:
> We've been laying out a new "Corporate Sponsors" page on WWW for the new web
> site. However, some debatable issues have arisen on who "qualifies" to be on
> the page. We've agreed, there, on listing:
> 1) Any company that sponsors a PostgreSQL major contributor's time;
> 2) Any company that has contributed a feature or significant add-in since
> 3) Any company which pays for or donates infrastructure resources for the
> The issues that aren't clear are:
> 1) do all mirrors get listed?
I think all active ones should be ... even if nobody uses that mirror,
they are contributing signification resources on their server to just
store everything ...
> 2) does documentation "count" as much as code?
Can we 'divide up' the page into area of contribution? Code, for
instance, would be at the top of the list, since, IMHO, that is the
*significant* contribution ... I'd almost put documentation just after
Code, in importance, since I do remember way back when when our docs
royally sucked, but nobody wanted to work on that since "where is the
> 3) do add-ins count if they are completely externally hosted?
I don't think so ... even stuff hosted on pgfoundry shouldn't really be
included, IMHO ...
> 4) If yes to (3), do they still count if they are not OSS?
Definitely not ...
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
In response to
pgsql-advocacy by date
|Next:||From: Robert Treat||Date: 2004-12-03 19:09:39|
|Subject: Re: Corporate Contributors WAS: merging advocacy and|
|Previous:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2004-12-03 18:38:57|
|Subject: Who's a "Corporate Sponsor"?|