Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Who's a "Corporate Sponsor"?

From: Jussi Mikkola <jussi(dot)mikkola(at)bonware(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Who's a "Corporate Sponsor"?
Date: 2004-12-03 19:37:04
Message-ID: 41B0C060.8060506@bonware.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy
Hi,

I think that basically all work should be equal. So if someone sponsors 
the www-development, that should be as valuable as sponsoring a feature. 
Since I guess we want to have the www-pages too? Then it is just a 
matter of how much time should be enough to be listed.

Regarding projects that are "outside" I think we could just refer to 
those projects as sponsors. Then those projects could themselves decide, 
who contributes to them or not.  This way postgresql project does not 
need to follow, who is contributing to Slony, but Slony would do that. 
Maybe not so much visibility for those companies, but still something. 
Of course, one way would be to tell the other projects to maintain a 
page, that would be included on the postgresql page. But that again can 
be quite hard to maintain. Or maybe even something stored into a 
database ;-)

No matter what page, it should surely be updated. If it is not updated, 
it should not be done at all. Just think that for example Fujitsu would 
announce that they are going to reduce costs, and leave the project, and 
it would still be displayed somewhere. Surely nobody would be happy 
about it.

Rgs,

Jussi


In response to

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Jan WieckDate: 2004-12-03 19:38:22
Subject: Re: Who's a "Corporate Sponsor"?
Previous:From: Robert TreatDate: 2004-12-03 19:31:01
Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] Corporate Contributors WAS:

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group