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
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
In response to
pgsql-advocacy by date
|Next:||From: Jan Wieck||Date: 2004-12-03 19:38:22|
|Subject: Re: Who's a "Corporate Sponsor"?|
|Previous:||From: Robert Treat||Date: 2004-12-03 19:31:01|
|Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] Corporate Contributors WAS:|