MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <aJ9ur1eSnk5pp9aD@msg.df7cb.de>
 <190A13D4-022B-4323-B30D-027B0D931DAF@hellug.gr>
 <aOj5NNxXdghSX66R@msg.df7cb.de> <0914098bd753b0a190d46adf5fc26314@hellug.gr>
In-Reply-To: <0914098bd753b0a190d46adf5fc26314@hellug.gr>
From: Kai Wagner <kai.wagner@percona.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2025 14:37:58 +0200
Message-ID: 
 <CAG0qCNhmtB3MKKfAA8GQtnC9x+W3YzV+-KKHsou-vkpgfy1DkQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Contributor levels
To: Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org>
Cc: PostgreSQL WWW <pgsql-www@lists.postgresql.org>,
	PostgreSQL Contributors <contributors@lists.postgresql.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a821c60640cd30bd"
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAG0qCNhmtB3MKKfAA8GQtnC9x%2BW3YzV%2B-KKHsou-vkpgfy1DkQ%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

--000000000000a821c60640cd30bd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Hi,

maybe it's just me as a none native English speaker but Significant
resonates the most with me and makes sense between Major and just
contributor.

Just my 2cents

Jimmy Angelakos <vyruss@hellug.gr> schrieb am Fr., 10. Okt. 2025, 14:35:

> On 10/10/2025 13:16, Christoph Berg wrote:
>
> Re: Jimmy Angelakos
>
> Hi Christoph,
>
> I think "Significant Contributor" fits in between "Major Contributor" and
> "Contributor".
>
> "Sustained" has a time element and sounds terrible on a CV :-) , and
> "Recognised" is kind of redundant, since they're all recognition levels.
>
>
> Hi,
>
> sorry for the long silence here, it's been holiday and conferences and
> work travel here for too long.
>
> We liked the "Significant" idea very much and had almost already
> settled on it when a new one came up: Notable Contributor. The levels
> would then be:
>
> Major Contributor
> Notable Contributor
> Contributor (see the other subthread)
>
> How do people like that?
>
> Frankly, "Significant" was apparently not sticking in anyone's brain,
> we constantly had to look it up again because it was competing with
> the other S-words "Sustained" and "Substantial". (Though I guess that
> would work out if we actually chose it.)
>
> Christoph
>
> Hi Christoph,
>
> It's not bad at all, but (at least in my head) it seems like there's not
> enough distance between "Notable" and plain "Contributor".
> For me, you can be notable for having once done something, it seems like
> it doesn't encompass the sense of sustained contribution as well as
> "Significant". I could be wrong.
>
> Best regards,
> Jimmy
>

--000000000000a821c60640cd30bd
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"auto">Hi,<div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">maybe it=
&#39;s just me as a none native English speaker but Significant resonates t=
he most with me and makes sense between Major and just contributor.</div><d=
iv dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Just my 2cents=C2=A0</div></div=
><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir=3D"ltr" clas=
s=3D"gmail_attr">Jimmy Angelakos &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:vyruss@hellug.gr">vy=
russ@hellug.gr</a>&gt; schrieb am Fr., 10. Okt. 2025, 14:35:<br></div><bloc=
kquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #cc=
c solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style=3D"font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana,=
Geneva,sans-serif">
<p>On 10/10/2025 13:16, Christoph Berg wrote:</p>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" style=3D"padding:0 0.4em;border-left:#1010ff 2px =
solid;margin:0">
<div style=3D"margin:0;padding:0;font-family:monospace">Re: Jimmy Angelakos
<blockquote type=3D"cite" style=3D"padding:0 0.4em;border-left:#1010ff 2px =
solid;margin:0">Hi Christoph,<br> <br> I think &quot;Significant Contributo=
r&quot; fits in between &quot;Major Contributor&quot; and &quot;Contributor=
&quot;.<br> <br> &quot;Sustained&quot; has a time element and sounds terrib=
le on a CV :-) , and &quot;Recognised&quot; is kind of redundant, since the=
y&#39;re all recognition levels.</blockquote>
<br> Hi,<br> <br> sorry for the long silence here, it&#39;s been holiday an=
d conferences and<br> work travel here for too long.<br> <br> We liked the =
&quot;Significant&quot; idea very much and had almost already<br> settled o=
n it when a new one came up: Notable Contributor. The levels<br> would then=
 be:<br> <br> Major Contributor<br> Notable Contributor<br> Contributor (se=
e the other subthread)<br> <br> How do people like that?<br> <br> Frankly, =
&quot;Significant&quot; was apparently not sticking in anyone&#39;s brain,<=
br> we constantly had to look it up again because it was competing with<br>=
 the other S-words &quot;Sustained&quot; and &quot;Substantial&quot;. (Thou=
gh I guess that<br> would work out if we actually chose it.)<br> <br> Chris=
toph<br> </div>
</blockquote>
<p>Hi Christoph,<br><br>It&#39;s not bad at all, but (at least in my head) =
it seems like there&#39;s not enough distance between &quot;Notable&quot; a=
nd plain &quot;Contributor&quot;.=C2=A0<br>For me, you can be notable for h=
aving once done something, it seems like it doesn&#39;t encompass the sense=
 of sustained contribution as well as &quot;Significant&quot;. I could be w=
rong.<br><br>Best regards,<br>Jimmy</p>

</div>
</blockquote></div>

--000000000000a821c60640cd30bd--