Re: Joining the OSA

From: Andy Astor <andy(dot)astor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Joshua Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Shane Ambler <pgsql(at)sheeky(dot)biz>
Subject: Re: Joining the OSA
Date: 2007-03-28 02:16:34
Message-ID: C22F4842.15BEA%andy.astor@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

Personally, folks, I don't think it's that big a deal to agree to join,
assuming the community generally supports the goals of the OSA. There's no
requirement for specific activities, and no one would get down on an
all-volunteer community for being relatively passive. All members (and
Friends) do what they can.

What we (and the OSA) get from the relationship is mostly associative in
nature. My personal opinion, for what it's worth, is that joining is a
positive thing. As Josh said in an earlier email, EnterpriseDB will cover
most of the responsibilities that might otherwise fall to the community. In
my mind, this is really a question other directional support.

Having said that, if the community either (a) doesn't see this as aligned
with its interests, or (b) has a policy against joining stuff like this,
then so be it.

Andy

On 3/27/07 7:37 PM, "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:

> Peter,
>
>> Responsibilities of All Members
>>
>> Membership, irrespective of membership class, also carries the
>> responsibility of publicly promoting the OSA ...
>
> Hmmm, thanks for reading the fine print. I agree, it does sound
> unrealistic.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2007-03-28 02:50:09 Re: Joining the OSA
Previous Message Erik Jones 2007-03-28 01:03:46 Re: Is there a shortage of postgresql skilled ops people