On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, Jean-Paul Argudo wrote:
> I think a company could be "Certified" when it hires a certain number of
> PostgreSQL "certified" individuals.
> All the point is determining how much...
If you just force the program to be open this issue largely resolves
itself. Companies that want to advertise their certification should have
to list their certified members. Leave it up to the buyer as to whether
they have enough of them, why should the certification authority be
needlessly complicated by worrying about this sort of thing?
The logical leap from there is to not certify companies except indirectly
via this mechanism, which solves the whole stack of logistics problems
that would otherwise come from trying to figure out just what a company
certification even means. Saying "you can list certification for a
company only in the context of listing your certified workers" makes the
issue go away.
* Greg Smith gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
In response to
pgsql-advocacy by date
|Next:||From: elein||Date: 2008-02-04 01:36:12|
|Subject: Re: New Shipment of Elephant Pins|
|Previous:||From: Jean-Paul Argudo||Date: 2008-02-04 00:14:23|
|Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Certification|
pgsql-general by date
|Next:||From: brian||Date: 2008-02-04 01:32:51|
|Subject: Re: Function returning subset of columns from table (return
|Previous:||From: Christopher Browne||Date: 2008-02-04 00:51:55|
|Subject: Re: postgresql book - practical or something newer?|