Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 3:49 AM, wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to be Mentor for Funded Reviewers. My mission will be: > 1) We are empowered to create a better world together. > 2) Together we co-create our existence. > 3) Together we make Postgresql project a success. > I am looking for long and fruitful association with Postgresql. > > I will require to get training in technical, functional and culture of > postgresql. > > Pl let me know, if you decide positively. > > Regards, > Vijay. I guess it's not up to me anyway, but this seems a bit odd considering that I can't recall you ever reviewing a patch yourself. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
Hi, I would like to be Mentor for Funded Reviewers. My mission will be: 1) We are empowered to create a better world together. 2) Together we co-create our existence. 3) Together we make Postgresql project a success. I am looking for long and fruitful association with Postgresql. I will require to get training in technical, functional and culture of postgresql. Pl let me know, if you decide positively. Regards, Vijay. - Original Message - From: "Joshua D. Drake" Date: Thursday, January 27, 2011 2:00 am Subject: Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers To: Robert Haas Cc: Richard Broersma , Simon Riggs , Josh Berkus , pgsql-rrreview...@postgresql.org, postgres hackers > On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 14:15 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Richard Broersma > > wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 3:12 AM, Simon Riggs > wrote: > > >> You're paying the reviewers; are you paying the mentors? > > > > > > The answer to this question is that we can fund mentor > (teacher). However, > > > the amount to fund a mentor would be significantly less that > the amount to > > > fund a reviewer (student). The mentors are part of the > educational process. > > > > Usually, in an educational process, it's the teachers who get paid, > > and the students who have to pay to get educated. I realize > this is > > somewhat different because we want to encourage people to get > involved> in the project, but it still seems weird. > > Not somewhat, completely. Most of the "teachers" we have are already > getting paid to work on PostgreSQL. There are some exceptions of > coursebut if you look at the list of people that are qualified to > actuallyreview code, they are getting paid *for PostgreSQL*. > > Now, that isn't to say you don't bring up a good point, you do. I > thinkit may be worthwhile to find a way to also compensate mentors > but as you > say the goal here is encourage people to get involved. However > there is > the underlying goal of educating future PostgreSQL contributors, and > let's face it --- reviewing code sucks and money is a great motivator > (especially in today's economy or if you are a starving student). > > > And I actually kind of > > agree with David Fetter. Aside from the scenario he mentioned > (people> who don't get paid stop volunteering, a phenomenon that > has been > > documented to occur in other contexts), > > You have people that are in it for the money. There is nothing wrong > with that. Hopefully through this grant they will gain enough > skill and > public notice to pick up a job where they might be able to give > back to > the community on a paid basis (probably not, but maybe). > > If people stop volunteering cause there is no money, then we care why? > They are likely not vested in the community anyway. Either way, the > mission has been accomplished. They were paid to be educated and learn > the review/commitfest process, they did so. If they wish to move on, > that's up to them. > > Do we want them to stay? Of course! However, I fail how to see the > concern has anything to do with the grant process. > > > there's also the problem that > > people might sign up to get the money but then do a lousy job. > > Well that is the risk we all face and if the mentor feedback was that > the person did a lousy job (let's assume they were just lazy, not that > they tried really hard but weren't up to the task), then they > would risk > ever receiving future grants. > > > People > > sometimes do a lousy job now too, but at least we can count on the > > fact that everyone who signs up to do it has some intrinsic > > motivation. > > I think anyone who is going to make it through a grant process > specifically for this purpose is going to have some intrinsic > motivationbeyond money. We aren't talking about shelling out 50k here. > > Sincerely, > > Joshua D. Drake > > -- > PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor > Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 509.416.6579 > Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering > http://twitter.com/cmdpromptinc | http://identi.ca/commandprompt > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers > -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 17:39 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Richard Broersma > wrote: > >> I'm not sure what you mean by this. > > > > Now that I read it, I not sure what I meant either. :) How about this: the > > selection, management, and oversight of grants and mentees should be opaque > > to the community so as to prevent distraction. There should be no > > appearance of community endorsement of such programs. > > I think there's no need to announce who you've made grants too, if > that's what you mean. But it shouldn't be hidden from the community > either. We ought to know who to praise/blame if something good/bad > happens. We are a 501c3. I don't think we are allowed to hide it even if we wanted to :P JD -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 509.416.6579 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering http://twitter.com/cmdpromptinc | http://identi.ca/commandprompt -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Richard Broersma wrote: >> I'm not sure what you mean by this. > > Now that I read it, I not sure what I meant either. :) How about this: the > selection, management, and oversight of grants and mentees should be opaque > to the community so as to prevent distraction. There should be no > appearance of community endorsement of such programs. I think there's no need to announce who you've made grants too, if that's what you mean. But it shouldn't be hidden from the community either. We ought to know who to praise/blame if something good/bad happens. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > I don't think that's it exactly. Basically, if you fund reviewers, > and we get lots more people doing reviews and they're all great, I'll > be happy. If you fund reviewers, and we get lots more people doing > reviews and they're all terrible, I'll be unhappy. And likewise if > you do or don't fund mentors. The results matter a lot, and none of > us know that for sure yet. This makes sense. I should clarify that this point in time were talking about one maybe two people can awarded grants. Over the course of a year I wouldn't expect more that four grants issued (at least for now.) With these numbers, there is too much to be gained or lost from the perceptive of the community in my opinion. > I think all I (and others) are asking you > do is think about it carefully before you decide what to do; I at > least am not trying to push you down any particular path. > Fair enough. > > So any person regardless of association or funding is free to approach to > > community for assistance. > > I strongly agree with that statement. Of course, all such help is on > a best-effort, volunteer basis. If you need more than that, you can > try (a) begging, (b) T-shirts, or (c) money. What's not clear to me > is whether you do in fact need more than that, and which of (a)-(c) is > the best way to get it. > > > In addition, third party organizations should > > maintain a healthy disconnection from the community. > > I'm not sure what you mean by this. > Now that I read it, I not sure what I meant either. :) How about this: the selection, management, and oversight of grants and mentees should be opaque to the community so as to prevent distraction. There should be no appearance of community endorsement of such programs. -- Regards, Richard Broersma Jr.
Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Richard Broersma wrote: > So I take it that the concern is not how reviews are funded, but over the > perceived connection between the organic community and third party > organizations. This makes sense. I don't think that's it exactly. Basically, if you fund reviewers, and we get lots more people doing reviews and they're all great, I'll be happy. If you fund reviewers, and we get lots more people doing reviews and they're all terrible, I'll be unhappy. And likewise if you do or don't fund mentors. The results matter a lot, and none of us know that for sure yet. I think all I (and others) are asking you do is think about it carefully before you decide what to do; I at least am not trying to push you down any particular path. > So any person regardless of association or funding is free to approach to > community for assistance. I strongly agree with that statement. Of course, all such help is on a best-effort, volunteer basis. If you need more than that, you can try (a) begging, (b) T-shirts, or (c) money. What's not clear to me is whether you do in fact need more than that, and which of (a)-(c) is the best way to get it. > In addition, third party organizations should > maintain a healthy disconnection from the community. I'm not sure what you mean by this. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 12:29:23PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 14:15 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Richard Broersma > > wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 3:12 AM, Simon Riggs > > > wrote: > > >> You're paying the reviewers; are you paying the mentors? > > > > > > The answer to this question is that we can fund mentor (teacher). > > > However, > > > the amount to fund a mentor would be significantly less that the amount to > > > fund a reviewer (student). The mentors are part of the educational > > > process. > > > > Usually, in an educational process, it's the teachers who get paid, > > and the students who have to pay to get educated. I realize this is > > somewhat different because we want to encourage people to get involved > > in the project, but it still seems weird. > > Not somewhat, completely. Most of the "teachers" we have are already > getting paid to work on PostgreSQL. There are some exceptions of course > but if you look at the list of people that are qualified to actually > review code, they are getting paid *for PostgreSQL*. > > Now, that isn't to say you don't bring up a good point, you do. I think > it may be worthwhile to find a way to also compensate mentors but as you > say the goal here is encourage people to get involved. However there is > the underlying goal of educating future PostgreSQL contributors, and > let's face it --- reviewing code sucks and money is a great motivator > (especially in today's economy or if you are a starving student). I admire your motives, and agree with them. We just differ on how best to do this. One situation I want to avoid is one where the mere offer of money, even if money never changes hands, totally changes the situation, and much for the worse. I'll be happy to describe such a situation off line if anyone's interested. Another is a system of perverse incentives, as others have described, and perverse incentives are harder to avoid up front than they first appear, as money is often itself an incentive to game systems in novel and terrible ways. One thing I've thought of that could help and would be a good use of money would be an extension to the pgbuildfarm code that detects and acts on bit rot. I don't have time to build it right now, but I'd be happy to iron out the spec and help someone else, that person being paid to develop it. Cheers, David. -- David Fetter http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fet...@gmail.com iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 1:19 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > It's just that > I require both income and sleep. That's probably not an issue for > people who are just getting started in the community. > > Another question is whether you really need assigned mentors at all. ... > Very few emails on -hackers go unanswered. > So I take it that the concern is not how reviews are funded, but over the perceived connection between the organic community and third party organizations. This makes sense. So any person regardless of association or funding is free to approach to community for assistance. In addition, third party organizations should maintain a healthy disconnection from the community. Is this correct? -- Regards, Richard Broersma Jr.
Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 3:29 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Not somewhat, completely. Most of the "teachers" we have are already > getting paid to work on PostgreSQL. There are some exceptions of course > but if you look at the list of people that are qualified to actually > review code, they are getting paid *for PostgreSQL*. Most people who are making their living from PostgreSQL are getting paid for work they do for customers. The work they do in the community is sponsored, incidental, something that they do for the PR value, and/or on their own time. There are only a very, very small number of people who get paid to spend a significant portion of their time hacking on PG just for the heck of it. Now, if you can get enough qualified people to volunteer to review without paying them, by all means, don't pay them - anything else would be silly. But I think that in general people who are earning their living off of PG are *more* likely to need to be paid, not less. My ability to increase the amount of PG stuff I'm doing for free is zero, if not negative. It's not that I don't want to. It's just that I require both income and sleep. That's probably not an issue for people who are just getting started in the community. Another question is whether you really need assigned mentors at all. Perhaps if newcomer Alice is assigned to mentor Bob, experienced PG hacker Charlie will feel he doesn't need to offer advice, because Bob's got it. But what if Bob (who isn't getting paid, after all) has to fly to Tajikistan that week to help somebody who IS paying him? Then Alice is left hanging. Or alternatively, what if Alice (knowing that Bob is her mentor) emails him repeatedly for advice off-list, but it turns out that Bob is out of step with the community on that particular issue[1]? Better to have Alice asking on the list and getting advice in public. Very few emails on -hackers go unanswered. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company [1] This has been known to happen. Even to people who might be referred to as Bob. Even today. I'm just saying. And don't call me Bob. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
Just a small comment: If someone offered me $15 to mentor a reviewer, I would tell him to kindly go away. If the same person were to offer me a $15 t-shirt saying I mentored the review (or whatever), I would consider it. Yes, I know I could buy the t-shirt with the money. People are strange that way. -- Álvaro Herrera The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 14:15 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Richard Broersma > wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 3:12 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > >> You're paying the reviewers; are you paying the mentors? > > > > The answer to this question is that we can fund mentor (teacher). However, > > the amount to fund a mentor would be significantly less that the amount to > > fund a reviewer (student). The mentors are part of the educational process. > > Usually, in an educational process, it's the teachers who get paid, > and the students who have to pay to get educated. I realize this is > somewhat different because we want to encourage people to get involved > in the project, but it still seems weird. Not somewhat, completely. Most of the "teachers" we have are already getting paid to work on PostgreSQL. There are some exceptions of course but if you look at the list of people that are qualified to actually review code, they are getting paid *for PostgreSQL*. Now, that isn't to say you don't bring up a good point, you do. I think it may be worthwhile to find a way to also compensate mentors but as you say the goal here is encourage people to get involved. However there is the underlying goal of educating future PostgreSQL contributors, and let's face it --- reviewing code sucks and money is a great motivator (especially in today's economy or if you are a starving student). > And I actually kind of > agree with David Fetter. Aside from the scenario he mentioned (people > who don't get paid stop volunteering, a phenomenon that has been > documented to occur in other contexts), You have people that are in it for the money. There is nothing wrong with that. Hopefully through this grant they will gain enough skill and public notice to pick up a job where they might be able to give back to the community on a paid basis (probably not, but maybe). If people stop volunteering cause there is no money, then we care why? They are likely not vested in the community anyway. Either way, the mission has been accomplished. They were paid to be educated and learn the review/commitfest process, they did so. If they wish to move on, that's up to them. Do we want them to stay? Of course! However, I fail how to see the concern has anything to do with the grant process. > there's also the problem that > people might sign up to get the money but then do a lousy job. Well that is the risk we all face and if the mentor feedback was that the person did a lousy job (let's assume they were just lazy, not that they tried really hard but weren't up to the task), then they would risk ever receiving future grants. > People > sometimes do a lousy job now too, but at least we can count on the > fact that everyone who signs up to do it has some intrinsic > motivation. I think anyone who is going to make it through a grant process specifically for this purpose is going to have some intrinsic motivation beyond money. We aren't talking about shelling out 50k here. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 509.416.6579 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering http://twitter.com/cmdpromptinc | http://identi.ca/commandprompt -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > Usually, in an educational process, it's the teachers who get paid, > and the students who have to pay to get educated. I realize this is > somewhat different because we want to encourage people to get involved > in the project, but it still seems weird. This is probably a good point. I've never mentored, taught, authored a patch or review, so I can say what is similar or different. > People > sometimes do a lousy job now too, but at least we can count on the > fact that everyone who signs up to do it has some intrinsic > motivation. > > http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/15/books/chapters/0515-1st-levitt.html > Interesting. -- Regards, Richard Broersma Jr.
Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
"David E. Wheeler" writes: > I think M. Fetter is completely wrong. If people are rethinking > whether they should volunteer based on whether other people are being > funded for their time to review patches, we don't want such people > around anyway. Let them leave. I can see his concern though: we have to be very careful to avoid establishing perverse incentives. The larger picture is that quite a few people are paid to work on Postgres already --- me, for instance. That doesn't seem to have discouraged other people from working on it on their own time. But I'm not paid according to how many bugs I find, and wouldn't want to be. I don't have a problem with funding people to work on Postgres. We just have to be careful that the grants aren't set up in a way that might encourage people to game the system. I'm also not sure that "review a patch" is a well-chosen specific goal to have here, especially not for people who've not been around the project at all. It's hard enough for people who *do* have a lot of context to do useful reviews. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Richard Broersma wrote: > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 3:12 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: >> You're paying the reviewers; are you paying the mentors? > > The answer to this question is that we can fund mentor (teacher). However, > the amount to fund a mentor would be significantly less that the amount to > fund a reviewer (student). The mentors are part of the educational process. Usually, in an educational process, it's the teachers who get paid, and the students who have to pay to get educated. I realize this is somewhat different because we want to encourage people to get involved in the project, but it still seems weird. And I actually kind of agree with David Fetter. Aside from the scenario he mentioned (people who don't get paid stop volunteering, a phenomenon that has been documented to occur in other contexts), there's also the problem that people might sign up to get the money but then do a lousy job. People sometimes do a lousy job now too, but at least we can count on the fact that everyone who signs up to do it has some intrinsic motivation. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/15/books/chapters/0515-1st-levitt.html -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
On Jan 26, 2011, at 9:40 AM, Richard Broersma wrote: > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 9:31 AM, David E. Wheeler > wrote: >> Part of GCOC's success has been in allowing a class of people to >> participate who otherwise would have had to get summer jobs flipping >> burgers. >>> >> > > This is essentially the idea for this grant, to fund a person in learning a > new skill. And hopefully, such a person might continue to offer support for > the project after the initial experience. Perfect. David -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 9:31 AM, David E. Wheeler wrote: > Part of GCOC's success has been in allowing a class of people to > participate who otherwise would have had to get summer jobs flipping > burgers. > This is essentially the idea for this grant, to fund a person in learning a new skill. And hopefully, such a person might continue to offer support for the project after the initial experience. -- Regards, Richard Broersma Jr.
Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
On Jan 26, 2011, at 7:48 AM, Richard Broersma wrote: > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 7:38 AM, David Fetter wrote: > >> I'm thinking that we should consider *very* carefully before we >> introduce payments into what had been an all-volunteer effort. You >> may get people to do things they might not otherwise have done, but >> you'll also make people wonder whether they should be volunteering at >> all. >> >> Offhand, I'd say this is a really bad idea. > > Wow, I hadn't considered this. > > But I'm reminded of GSOC, which is essentially doing something similar. Has > this effect already taken place among the volunteering patch writers? GCOC has been great. It helps bring in people who otherwise might not have participated in a project. IME, those who were already on a project were glad to have them. I think M. Fetter is completely wrong. If people are rethinking whether they should volunteer based on whether other people are being funded for their time to review patches, we don't want such people around anyway. Let them leave. You might consider targeting a specific audience, though. Part of GCOC's success has been in allowing a class of people to participate who otherwise would have had to get summer jobs flipping burgers. If you're helping people to help the project who otherwise could not have, it's a good thing. Best, David -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 6:15 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > Many people are contributing patches for free. Will those people get > paid to fix their own bugs? I guess they might well be better at finding > and fixing them than others, so it is an interesting question. I remember hearing about a case where the programmers started leaving bugs in their code on purpose, so they could get paid for fixing them. Setting these things up so that they work well can be tricky. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 14:14 +, Dave Page wrote: > On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Richard Broersma > wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Dave Page wrote: > >> > >> Will the scheme be open to everyone, or just .USians? > > > > I do believe that such grants are limited to members of PgUS. Although, I > > should mention that there's no restriction for residents of any country > > becoming a member of PgUS. > > OK. Correct. You will have to be a member of PgUS. However, we don't restrict who can be a member. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 509.416.6579 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering http://twitter.com/cmdpromptinc | http://identi.ca/commandprompt -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Richard Broersma wrote: > On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Dave Page wrote: >> >> Will the scheme be open to everyone, or just .USians? > > I do believe that such grants are limited to members of PgUS. Although, I > should mention that there's no restriction for residents of any country > becoming a member of PgUS. OK. >> >> If the latter, >> I'd be a little concerned that it may have a negative effect on >> attracting reviewers from outside the US. > > Hmm... I hadn't considered the possibility of PgUS grants beings a turn-off > to potential non-US residents. Would PgUS's open enrollment alleviate your > concern? Yes, I think so. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Dave Page wrote: > > Will the scheme be open to everyone, or just .USians? I do believe that such grants are limited to members of PgUS. Although, I should mention that there's no restriction for residents of any country becoming a member of PgUS. > If the latter, > I'd be a little concerned that it may have a negative effect on > attracting reviewers from outside the US. > Hmm... I hadn't considered the possibility of PgUS grants beings a turn-off to potential non-US residents. Would PgUS's open enrollment alleviate your concern? -- Regards, Richard Broersma Jr.
Re: [RRR] [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 2:43 AM, Richard Broersma wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: >> >> On 1/24/11 12:17 PM, Richard Broersma wrote: >> > PgUS is preparing to fund a grant for PgUS members to learn and >> > participate in the patch review process. We looking for experienced >> > reviewers that can assist a candidate through to process of testing a >> > patch - to submitting the final review. The ultimate deliverable >> > would be the actual review posted to Hackers. >> > >> > Would anyone be available to assist with this? >> >> Do we have candidate mentees? >> > > Not at the moment. Were still in the process of getting ready. > > We have the funding. We're looking for mentors. Next we'll just about > ready to open the application process. But I'd expect several weeks to pass > before have ready to look at applicants. Will the scheme be open to everyone, or just .USians? If the latter, I'd be a little concerned that it may have a negative effect on attracting reviewers from outside the US. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
