Re: Release Candidate of the PostgreSQL Europe association statutes

On 13/01/2008, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> So PostgreSQL EU is supposed to be like SPI except for a EU focus?
> Interesting.

That was my understanding of the outcome of the meeting in Prato. We
would become an umbrella organisation to support individual user
groups in different countries, providing standard flyers and swag etc,
legal and financial services and so on.

> It is how PostgreSQLFR does it now as I recall.

Which is understandable, because they are a user group, presumably
providing newsletters, and organising events etc. for their members -
similar to what JPUG does I imagine. The vast majority of people in
those organisations are joining (and paying) for the benefits, not for
what they can contribute.

> Well just to be clear, SPI (which per our jabber conversation is who you
> are talking about) does have a formal membership concept. Not "anyone"
> can join. Although SPI does not charge for membership.
>
> http://www.spi-inc.org/about-spi/membership

Yeah, I am one. I was thinking more about the PostgreSQL Funds Group
and -advocacy though, SPI being more or less just a bank account in
that case (yes, I know it's not quite that simple).

> This is kind of a tangent here but I would note that the money that we
> have in that account, for the most part is "solicited" in one form or
> another. The community puts forth a great deal of effort to receive
> those donations.
>
> If the EU non-profit wants to be successful on that tier, there is going
> to be some hard work to be done.

No doubt.

> Many professional trade organizations require membership fees. I for the
> most part don't have a problem with it. Although I was surprised that I
> was asked for money to join PostgreSQLFR.

Yes - and I'd expect to pay those to the UK PostgreSQL User Group
(which is being worked on), which in turn I would expect to be
supported by the EU organisation (acting in a similar manner to PG-FG
& SPI rolled into one).

/D