Message-ID: <471326F3.8090004@postgresql.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 09:38:11 +0100
From: Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
CC: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, pgsql-www@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Approval process for news/events/training is broken
References: <470A72CD.4050304@agliodbs.com>
	<200710120001.50415.josh@agliodbs.com>
	<470F3F7B.4030904@postgresql.org>
	<200710141454.44871.josh@agliodbs.com>
	<47131C0A.8070206@postgresql.org>
	<20071015081927.GB4653@svr2.hagander.net>
In-Reply-To: <20071015081927.GB4653@svr2.hagander.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 08:51:38AM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
>> Josh Berkus wrote:
>>> Dave, all:
>>>
>>>>> http://developer.postgresql.org/index.php/NewsEventsApproval
>>>> Looks very good to me.
>>> No objections or modifications?  Can we make the document canonical and link 
>>> the criteria from the Submit page, then?
>> No, I'm fine with it. We should format it up as part of the main site
>> rather than linking to the wiki.
> 
> One clearification - does "Postgresql family news" include all pgfoundry
> projects, or just "major" ones? If second, how do we define which are
> major?

It should be all - after all, they have a fairly rigourous approval
process to get on pgFoundry in the first place.

> Also, looking back at the news just added today, is "EnterpriseDB Postgres"
> considered a "postgresql family product" or a commercial one? Maybe a
> guidance bullet on "downstream distributions"?

It's certainly not commercial, but yes that does seem worth clarifying.

> As for events, I'm not sure I agree with the very last point, about
> "conferences with little pg content". I think that depends a lot - in some
> areas, having a single postgresql session *is* a major event. It no longer
> is in the US for example, but in a lot of other places it is.

It's a bit subjective. I'd be happy with any level of content from a
single session up, as long as it includes details so people don't spend
serious money getting somewhere only to find just a single session.

> Training events - should we require that they include information about the
> cost to attend?

Sounds reasonable.

/D