Subject: merging advocacy and "overview"

From: Robert Treat <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 00:46:01 -0500

I've been looking at how to move the content from advocacy.postgresql.org into 
the main www site.   The central idea is that we want to maintain a space for 
new users / people who are just investigating postgresql, and one area for 
everyday users of postgresql.  While there is certainly room for overlap in 
regards to content the two groups might be interested in, I think this fits 
in fairly well with how things have been laid out in the past.  I am current 
leaning toward making a new menu item called "advocacy" and renaming the 
overview/about section to "community".  With that here is how I see the 
content breaking down into those two sections:

advocacy/
                        generalabout{a}
                        features{u}
                        limitations{u}
                        shorthistory{a}
                        members{a}
                        corporate{a}
                        advantages{a}
                        case studies{a}
                        requestinfo{a}
                        presskit{u}
                        license{a}

community/
                        users{ex}
                        store{ex}
                        donate{ex}
                        books{u}
                        related projects{u}
                        interfacing to postgresql{u}
                        [docs]
                        [support]

key:
{a} = comes from advocacy site
{u} = comes from users lounge
{ex} = links to external site
[] = internal link

-- 
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL

---

From: Josh Berkus <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 22:37:58 -0800

Robert,

> I am current leaning toward making a new menu item called "advocacy"
> and renaming the overview/about section to "community".  With that here is
> how I see the content breaking down into those two sections:

I think this is overall a very good idea.  However, I think it should be 
called "about" and not "advocacy".  "about" is a web industry convention, and 
new people know to automatically go to "about" for stuff like press links, 
supporters, contact info, etc.

Some comments below.

>                         members{a}

Doesn't this duplicate the developer site portion?

>                         corporate{a}

We'll need to come up with some rules on who can appear here.  My thoughts:
1) Anyone who sponsors a full-time or 1/2 time developer;
2) Anyone who has sponsored a significant feature in the last 3 versions.
3) Anyone who contributed/runs an add-in project in recent use.

>                         requestinfo{a}

Definitely keep this.  I'll want to revise the form, but I currently get 5-10 
e-mails a day.  It's been very useful.

>                         presskit{u}

Which means I need to work on a general, non-version-specific presskit, eh?  
Give me some time after 8.0.

>                         users{ex}

What is this?

>                         interfacing to postgresql{u}

Hmmm ... won't documentation be a top-level category?

-- 
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

---

From: Robert Treat <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 10:25:46 -0500

On Thursday 02 December 2004 01:37, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > and renaming the overview/about section to "community".  With that here
> > is how I see the content breaking down into those two sections:
>
> called "about" and not "advocacy".  "about" is a web industry convention,
> and new people know to automatically go to "about" for stuff like press
> links, supporters, contact info, etc.
>

the only reason to go with advocacy is due to it's replacing 
advocacy.postgresql.org;  ie. it's a community standard vs. industry 
standard.  

> Doesn't this duplicate the developer site portion?

This is the top half of http://advocacy.postgresql.org/about/  
as opposed to http://developer.postgresql.org/bios.php

long term those two might need to be merged, but for now I think we can leave 
them seperate.  

> 3) Anyone who contributed/runs an add-in project in recent use.

yeah. one thing to keep in mind is how this will play alongside the foundation 
info. 

>
> >                         advantages{a}
> >                         case studies{a}
> >                         requestinfo{a}
>
> Definitely keep this.  I'll want to revise the form, but I currently get
> 5-10 e-mails a day.  It's been very useful.
>
> >                         presskit{u}
>

Well, maybe, but for now we can link to the version specific stuff, will need 
to update it with each release anyway... 

> What is this?

http://www.pgsql.com/user_gallery

> Hmmm ... won't documentation be a top-level category?

Yes, but it seems critical enough to warrent a redundent link, along with 
support.

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 12:17:21 -0400 (AST)

> 2) Anyone who has sponsored a significant feature in the last 3 versions.

Not sure if I agree with a 'time limit' on this one ... there should be 
some sort of 'history' section ... if we are remembering a contribution, 
it should be remembered, not 'fade out over time' ...

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: [email-masked]           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 08:57:07 -0800

> Not sure if I agree with a 'time limit' on this one ... there should 
> be some sort of 'history' section ... if we are remembering a 
> contribution, it should be remembered, not 'fade out over time' ...

I think Marc has an interesting point. The other issue is what about 
companies who may not sponsor a ton of code but troll the mailing lists? 
Or provide major services like hosting? Or secondary code like the .Net 
provider?

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
>               http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html

-- 
Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC
Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-667-4564 - [email-masked] - http://www.commandprompt.com
PostgreSQL Replicator -- production quality replication for PostgreSQL

---

From: Robert Treat <[email-masked]>
Date: 02 Dec 2004 12:10:12 -0500

> Or provide major services like hosting? Or secondary code like the .Net 

This is why we never came up with a guideline... 

Robert Treat

---

From: Josh Berkus <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:18:22 -0800

Marc, Robert,

> > > contribution, it should be remembered, not 'fade out over time' ...

Well, the main reason I wanted the 3-year limit is that I don't want to try to 
research what companies contributed code in 1989.   I expect that we'll be 
pretty casual about taking companies "off for expiration" -- if we ever do.

> > companies who may not sponsor a ton of code but troll the mailing lists?

No.  Why would we care?  Unless you have a different meaning for "troll" than 
I do?

> > Or provide major services like hosting? 

Yes.

> > Or secondary code like the .Net 
> > provider?

Yes, *especially* these.

-- 
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 09:24:53 -0800

>No.  Why would we care?  Unless you have a different meaning for "troll" than 
Sorry. I use troll differently than others. I just mean someone
who constantly lurks and participates.

---

From: Josh Berkus <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:37:28 -0800

Josh,

> who constantly lurks and participates.

No.   We need to list contributors, companies who have given something to the 
project, not every company that uses PostgreSQL.   There should be a 
different list for that ....

-- 
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

---

From: Josh Berkus <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:39:37 -0800

Robert,

> advocacy.postgresql.org;  ie. it's a community standard vs. industry

Sure.  However, I'm more concerned about the public & press being able to find 
things than long-term community members, who can always ask on IRC.  "About" 
is instantly understandable to web users;  "Advocacy" is not.

So, an example of "About", a la Omar:
http://postgresql.tinysofa.com/about/casestudies

I think this works.

-- 
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

---

From: Omar Kilani <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 13:03:24 -0500

> http://postgresql.tinysofa.com/about/casestudies

Additionally, we've already restructured and pretty much finished the 
whole site. And see no reason why it can't be in for the 15th of December.

Omar

---

From: elein <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 10:52:09 -0800

And where does something like General Bits fit in as
a link?  Does that contribution (along with advocacy stuff)
rate a corporate sponsor link?  Is auxilliary information
equivalent to code contributions?  What about advocacy work?
I obviously would like to see Varlena, LLC on the corporate
sponsor list, at least for the time I spend writing and
publishing.

--elein

On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 09:18:22AM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>       subscribe-nomail command to [email-masked] so that your
>       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>

---

From: Oleg Bartunov <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 21:56:16 +0300 (MSK)

> project, not every company that uses PostgreSQL.   There should be a

we already have some list of companies 
http://advocacy.postgresql.org/about/

> different list for that ....

 	Regards,
 		Oleg
_____________________________________________________________
Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet,
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia)
Internet: [email-masked], http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83

---

From: Robert Treat <[email-masked]>
Date: 02 Dec 2004 14:02:08 -0500

> whole site. And see no reason why it can't be in for the 15th of December.

I see a number of things that need to changed, but nothing that seems
like a complete deal breaker. Omar, how long would it take you to work
up some patches for the work you have done? 

Robert Treat

---

From: Josh Berkus <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 11:07:23 -0800

Elein, Oleg,

> sponsor list, at least for the time I spend writing and

I'd list it.   Documentation contributions are still contributions.  The link 
to General Bits itself would go on the Documentation page, of course.

> http://advocacy.postgresql.org/about/

Yep, and this is out-of-date and inadequate.  That's what I want to fix.

--Josh

-- 
__Aglio Database Solutions_______________
Josh Berkus		       Consultant
[email-masked]	 www.agliodbs.com
Ph: 415-752-2500	Fax: 415-752-2387
2166 Hayes Suite 200	San Francisco, CA

---

From: Alexey Borzov <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 22:09:32 +0300

Hi,

Omar Kilani wrote:
>> Sure.  However, I'm more concerned about the public & press being able 
>> to find things than long-term community members, who can always ask on 
>> IRC.  "About" is instantly understandable to web users;  "Advocacy" is 
>> not.
>>

Seems like http://postgresql.tinysofa.com/ is down.

> whole site. And see no reason why it can't be in for the 15th of December.

I see one obvious reason: hosting. http://wwwdevel.postgresql.org/ still has 2-3 
second page generation times.

And of course there also was a discussion on "which design is better" which did 
not lead to any decision.

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 16:20:41 -0400 (AST)

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004, elein wrote:

> And where does something like General Bits fit in as a link?  Does that 
> contribution (along with advocacy stuff) rate a corporate sponsor link? 
> Is auxilliary information equivalent to code contributions?  What about 
> advocacy work? I obviously would like to see Varlena, LLC on the 
> corporate sponsor list, at least for the time I spend writing and 
> publishing.

I'm kinda confused, myself, about General Bits ... from one email I 
received, I got the impression that it was a 'subscription based service' 
that you provided ... can you clarify this?  But, I was always under the 
impression that it was a 'free service' :(

----

---

From: Robert Treat <[email-masked]>
Date: 02 Dec 2004 15:24:57 -0500

> to General Bits itself would go on the Documentation page, of course.

Hmm... I wouldn't, otherwise we'll have to list every company that we
put a link on the website for. The fact that it lives at the Varlena
website means we'll be sending traffic that way already.

To me the corporate sponsor page is for the "people behind the scenes"
that make postgresql happen. Like hub and command prompt who offer
hosting/dns services, or 2nd Quadrant that donated Simon to work on
PITR, things you wouldn't know unless we told you. With Varlena, they
provide an ancillary service, much like EMS Hitech or Nusphere or
Dotgeek, that may be of interest to people in the postgresql community,
but they aren't providing community resources.  Sure we want to let
people know about these things, but we shouldn't feel beholden to
them.        

Robert Treat

---

From: Robert Treat <[email-masked]>
Date: 02 Dec 2004 15:30:34 -0500

> Seems like http://postgresql.tinysofa.com/ is down.

odd, working ok from this side of the globe. 

> second page generation times.

We'll need to address this, but I think it is doable.  We should still
be serving up mostly static content anyways, right?
 
> not lead to any decision.

One of the things on my list of things to be squared away, but otoh all
of the designs we have seen so far are "better", so that shouldn't keep
us from release. 

Robert Treat

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 16:40:28 -0400 (AST)

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004, Robert Treat wrote:

> people know about these things, but we shouldn't feel beholden to them.

Hopefully Elein will clarify, but I don't *think* that General Bits would 
be classified in the same league as 'EMS' or 'Nusphere' ... if General 
Bits is a "for free resource", then it has as much value as techdocs, I 
would think ... if its a 'subscription only service', then I'd lump it in 
with EMS/Nusphere ...

If 'for free', then she is probably a value service to the community ... 
IMHO ...

---

From: elein <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 12:44:50 -0800

General Bits is my way of contributing back to the community.
It is a FREE service.   It contains articles and examples 
about PostgreSQL only.  It has about two years worth of weekly
issues containing one to six articles in each issue.  All
old issues are available and where possible translation has
been done into Castellano and Portuguese.

Subscriptions (donations) can be made to help offset my time.  
You get a few perks with that. But honestly, only a handful of 
people subscribe. If I were making money on this I think my
request would be unreasonable. But I'm not.  I'll talk numbers
with anyone nosy enough to ask :-)

Most people who go to General Bits never go to my main web
site.  The link is always published directly to the latest
column.  (In the spirit of sunshine, General Bits is on
vacation until January however.)

Because the intent of the site is to give back to the community
and because it has been achieving that goal I politely disagree
with Robert Treat's interpretation of GB as something not part
of the community as a whole.

elein

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 16:48:31 -0400 (AST)

> be serving up mostly static content anyways, right?

Ya, and I believe Dave is working on something as regards the generation 
aspect ... he got me to add an entry in DNS for some work he's doing on 
the pgadmin.org machine ...

----

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 17:07:09 -0400 (AST)

> of the community as a whole.

Have to say that I'd agree, based on the above ... I know I've used it at 
least once when doing research on the whole FSM stuff ...

----

---

From: Robert Treat <[email-masked]>
Date: 02 Dec 2004 16:12:10 -0500

On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 15:40, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> would think ... 

except that techdocs is community run and controlled. if I were to start
putting up logo's all over the site directing to my personal business I
bet most people here would have an issue with that. 

if its a 'subscription only service', then I'd lump it in 
> If 'for free', then she is probably a value service to the community ... 

OK, but what about dotgeek? They provide a valuable service to the
community by giving free webhosting with postgresql. Are they a
community sponsor too ?  Heck, by that token the Open Source Technology
Group ought to be listed as well, since we have software available from
both sourceforge and freshmeat, along with several important side
projects. All of these companies drive traffic to their own sites to
further their own agendas. If they want it to be a community resource,
take down all their logos and put up some blue elephant heads. 

Robert Treat

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 20:39:09 -0400 (AST)

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004, Robert Treat wrote:

> community sponsor too ?

as long as they are a strong community sponsor ... but, ummm ... right on 
their front page ... "The new server will *not support PostgreSQL* so 
please migrate your DB to MySQL (using the mygeek area of the site) or 
SQLite. "

seems they are a bit mysql-centric, no?

----

---

From: elein <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 18:06:09 -0800

> bet most people here would have an issue with that. 

You would begrudge me a 1.25 inch logo for bothering to write 4 or 5 pages
a week of alternative documentation in hopes of spreading understanding of PostgreSQL
as well as hosting the site?  We are not so petty as a group.

I understand that you resent the fact that it is an external site at all, 
however, with the traffic that goes on on www I would point out that my site 
has not been down other than seasonal maintenance for years.  And getting
my column site hosted with postgresql.org is prohibitively difficult and
would take all my energy that would better spent on writing things simply
and being expressive in my own weird style.  Do not think I did not
and have not considered moving to postgresql.org if it would have me.
I have considered it and watched how things work and I am content in
my choice (so far) to host on my own site.

> take down all their logos and put up some blue elephant heads. 

The primary goal of the column is to give back to the PostgreSQL community what
I can do best in the way I can best do it.  The benefits in karma and good
will keep me going.  I generally put in 8 hours, sometimes 16, sometimes 4, 
per week to write what I write.  From feedback I get, I understand the form of 
the column is a good adjunct to formal documentation.  And I only write about PostgreSQL.

The published links do not go to my main site, they go directly to
the column.  And my site is not a subscription only service.  Do you want
to know the total amount of monetary donations I've received over the
past 2 years I've been publishing?  

Contribution is about content not logos.  I think I deserve to be
on the corporate sponsor page.  Obviously I have not been a fly-by-night
contributor.

============================================================
[email-masked]        Varlena, LLC        www.varlena.com

          PostgreSQL Consulting, Support & Training   

PostgreSQL General Bits   http://www.varlena.com/GeneralBits/
=============================================================
I have always depended on the [QA] of strangers.

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 22:18:12 -0400 (AST)

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004, elein wrote:

> I understand that you resent the fact that it is an external site at 
> all, however, with the traffic that goes on on www I would point out 
> that my site has not been down other than seasonal maintenance for 
> years.  And getting my column site hosted with postgresql.org is 
> prohibitively difficult and would take all my energy that would better 
> spent on writing things simply and being expressive in my own weird 
> style.  Do not think I did not and have not considered moving to 
> postgresql.org if it would have me. I have considered it and watched how 
> things work and I am content in my choice (so far) to host on my own 
> site.

Just as an FYI, I'd not be adverse to a subdomain on postgresql.org for 
the general bits stuff ... not sure if anyone else would be against it, 
mind you, but if you ever need/desire, just ask ...

----

---

From: Justin Clift <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:16:34 +1100

elein wrote:
<snip>
> of the community as a whole.

If it's any help, my opinion is that General Bits is much more a 
Community Resource (like Techdocs was back in the day ;-> ) than a 
Commercial add-on/enhancement or similar.

I don't think it hurts us to add Varlena to the Commercial Sponsors type 
of section, because it takes a lot of time and effort to make and 
maintain a good, worthwhile, Community Resource like this that enhances 
a Community, and raises the knowledge bar for everyone.

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift

---

From: Justin Clift <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:25:59 +1100

Robert Treat wrote:
<snip>
> projects.

Interesting thought.

Um, I think the distinction here is that Elein is intimately personally 
involved in the PostgreSQL Community and spends a lot of time and effort 
to further our Community *specifically*.

If the people of dotgeek and OSTG were consistently doing the same, then 
we'd probably consider them a lot more "part of the family" than we do.

Does that yardstick make sense?

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift

---

From: Robert Bernier <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 07:00:55 -0500

On December 2, 2004 04:12 pm, Robert Treat wrote:
> What about dotgeek? They provide a valuable service to the
> community by giving free webhosting with postgresql. 

Have you looked at their site recently; they're dropping postgres

---

From: Robert Treat <[email-masked]>
Date: 03 Dec 2004 09:53:41 -0500

> Does that yardstick make sense?

Doesn't Adi work for OSTG? He is a regular on IRC and attended OSCon
where I saw him promoting PostgreSQL on a number of occasions. 

But I think this misses the point. What contributions has Varlena LLC
made that don't go outside the realm of the those things controlled by
the PostgreSQL Community? I see no articles/content written for either
the main website or techdocs. I see no code contributions. I see no
projects that are sponsored. There is nothing there that doesn't go
directly back to Varlena.  Varlena isn't the only company that operates
like this, take Kineticode for example. They provide a service to the
community free of charge, they help promote postgresql in a number of
ways, heck they even have someone who is quite chummy with the community
working for them, but I just don't think of them as a corporate sponsor,
nor do I think they need special recognition; if you use bricolage
you'll find out about them. Maybe I am just setting the bar to high, but
how far are we going to go the other way?  If a company designates a
person to be a regional contact does that make them a corporate
sponsor?  Or even worse, perhaps I could strike a deal with some company
to host the weekly news on the web, and in return they would get to
drive traffic to their website and get listed as a postgresql corporate
sponsor?  Is this where we want things to go?  One reason why I've
always insisted that if we were going to put the weekly news on the web
we would do it on a community controlled website is because I don't want
things to go there.  Apparently I'm in the minority on this position
though. 

Robert Treat

---

From: Robert Treat <[email-masked]>
Date: 03 Dec 2004 09:53:46 -0500

> as well as hosting the site?  We are not so petty as a group.

Wow, given how quickly you jump to personal attacks apparently we are so
petty a group. I don't think anyone here is simple enough to not realize
the advantages of driving lots of traffic directly to your companies
website, so lets not pretend otherwise, ok?

> I understand that you resent the fact that it is an external site at all, 

Why are you trying to make this a personal thing?  I don't resent
anything, your free to do what you want with your time and resources,
but don't be upset when I call a spade a spade. I've gone round about on
this type of thing with several other people too, and I'm not the only
one who has these types of concerns. 

> on the corporate sponsor page.  Obviously I have not been a fly-by-night

Contribution is about giving away, no matter what the content. Some
people think my$ql is a free database too, but like general bits, it is
completely owned and controlled by a single company, and it's future
currently depends primarily on the best interests of the company before
that of the community. Now some people are ok with this type of thing,
but there are other ways to do things. Look at ecpg, one of our most
popular packages that is primarily maintained by Michael Meskes. Now he
could certainly host the package on the Credativ website and reap all
the benefits of driving traffic his way, but he doesn't do that at all.
Now there is a company that needs more recognition. 

Robert Treat

---

From: Robert Treat <[email-masked]>
Date: 03 Dec 2004 09:53:50 -0500

> seems they are a bit mysql-centric, no?

Hmm... guess they couldn't get enough traction to stick with postgresql.
Maybe things would have been different if we had properly recognized
them as a corporate sponsor...

By the way, nice how you glossed over the OSTG in your response. Guess
theres no point in mentioning companies like minq.se, kazak, and
aliacta, companies who all provide free tools to the community as a way
to drive traffic to their websites. 

Robert Treat

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 07:01:47 -0800

>website, so lets not pretend otherwise, ok?

Woah... maybe we should just write both of these responses off as a
misuderstanding :)

Elein, to be fair no one is begrudging you anything. We are just
trying to determine what the guidelines for things are.

>>on the corporate sponsor page.  Obviously I have not been a fly-by-night
Nobody has said yet that you won't be. However, a gentler approach
may be a better way. I don't think anyone here thinks you are
a fly by night contributor.

>that of the community.
The above is a good point. Varlena have you thought
of making General Bits a PgFoundry project. I know it
sounds weird, but you could release each "file" and have
a separate web page.

Would seem a more community driven project at that point?

I am just throwing ideas here at this point.

> Now some people are ok with this type of thing,

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 07:08:16 -0800

>them as a corporate sponsor...

Not likely to be honest :) There are just more mysql users
than PostgreSQL users and considering they are offering
free hosting...

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 07:55:25 -0800

> One reason why I've
I don't believe you are the minority with this position. All
of your points of valid and I agree with them.

 From Command Prompt's position, it wasn't UNTIL we started
offering code back, and providing services to the community
directly that we received recognition.

An example is Practical PostgreSQL. That book has been
online since the day it hit shelves, free for anyone to use.
But it isn't the same as say donating patches to ECPG or
PlPerl which gets directly injected into the community.
Practical PostgreSQL is a community resource, but it is
not community sponsored.

This doesn't mean that someone's (like Varlena) contributions
aren't welcome or appreciated but they are not PostgreSQL
projects.

At first this was an annoyance but as we have become more
involved and seen how things worked, it makes sense.

Although not all of our community giveback is controlled
or directed via the community this is because some of it
must maintain a commercial interest.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

---

From: Josh Berkus <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 10:18:16 -0800

Robert, Josh, Elein, etc.:

I do think this is important to settle.   Right now, it's General Bits which 
sits square on the border between "contribution" and "external"; Next time it 
might be someone else.   Sucks for Elein that it's your site we're talking 
about, but it helps us make some rules that we'll need again later.

However, I think that we should take this over to -Advocacy.   Even though 
this will mean a more chaotic discussion, it IS what the Advocacy list is 
for, and if we make decisions here without raising them there, we might as 
well kill that list.

So I'll be laying things out for that list.

> Practical PostgreSQL is a community resource, but it is

On the other hand, PL/PHP is considered a "contribution" even though it is 
hosted at CMD's site.

-- 
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 10:29:09 -0800

> On the other hand, PL/PHP is considered a "contribution" even though it is 

Well that brings up another paradigm of course, which would be 
popularity. If I recall, plPHP was actually considered to be put into
core but it can't be because it was a circular dependency.

(You have to have the PHP source to make plPHP, that is not the case
with plPerl or plPython).

To be honest I hadn't even thought about plPHP because oddly enough 
plPerlNG is more popular.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

-- 
Command Prompt, Inc., home of PostgreSQL Replication, and plPHP.
Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-667-4564 - [email-masked] - http://www.commandprompt.com
Mammoth PostgreSQL Replicator. Integrated Replication for PostgreSQL

---

From: Robert Treat <[email-masked]>
Date: 03 Dec 2004 14:09:39 -0500

> So I'll be laying things out for that list.

Agreed. And none of it should effect website completion so it's best to
take it off this list. 

> On the other hand, PL/PHP is considered a "contribution" even though it is 

I've spoken with Joshua before about this and I don't really see it as a
community contribution myself. I think the only reasons others do is
because of the other things that command prompt donates that are
contributions (plperl/servers/etc..)

Robert Treat

---

From: Robert Treat <[email-masked]>
Date: 03 Dec 2004 14:31:01 -0500

> with plPerl or plPython).

I think (hope) eventually it will become a project up on pgfoundry,
built using the pgxs tech, living a lot like plr. 

Robert Treat