Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
Dave, > Hiroshi Saito has made a number of smaller but important contributions > this cycle. Thanks. I was being surprised to see only one Japanese contributor this cycle. > Heikki is from Finland, but currently living in the UK. Thanks! > You also missed my name despite it being attributed to 3 items in the > release notes, but I don't suppose that matters as I'm in the core > section anyway. Damn. I think I kept skipping it because I thought I'd already put it in. I'll bet I missed another core member too. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL @ Sun San Francisco ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 14:16:16 -0500 (EST) Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I believe the reason we don't publicize who is a committer is that > > we have non-committers who do a lot more for the project. Commit > > rights are usually given to people who do a lot of patches (perhaps > > small ones) while people who develop larger patches are less likely > > to get commit rights rapidly. > > Of course the next question is why core is split out, especially since > core's role is mostly for confidential company contacts and > discipline. *shrug* I have always considered core a steering committee type of deal. Not "in charge" persay but there as a focal point when needed (like the name change decision that was finally made). It seems to me that it makes sense, based on that to break it out. However there is another consideration in that at least two core members seem to have zero interest in being involved in a very public way like you suggest above. So perhaps it makes sense for core to be inclusive of the list and instead push all "contacts" to a contacts page. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake - -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ UNIQUE NOT NULL Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHTb9OATb/zqfZUUQRArpyAJ9H4ANMkcYvvQ/EkmL9ZySSM1PNJQCfaEFi kEFgzu+0FjRgA+i2RdxbxIE= =BGTr -END PGP SIGNATURE- ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
Bruce Momjian wrote: > Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > > I don't have a problem with that, but I think core code committers > > > and www maintainers should be identified separately. > > > > Why? Then we have to also separate advocacy which is just as important > > and pgfoundry... as well as possibly a host of others. We all have our > > job in the community :). > > > > > On a closely > > > related note: last time I looked there was no way for anyone to > > > discover on the web site who the committers actually are. That would > > > also probably be useful. > > > > See Dave's response about core not wanting committers that easily > > identified. I actually recall this argument, basically there are times > > when commit access might be revoked temporarily etc... IIRC.. > > I believe the reason we don't publicize who is a committer is that we > have non-committers who do a lot more for the project. Commit rights > are usually given to people who do a lot of patches (perhaps small ones) > while people who develop larger patches are less likely to get commit > rights rapidly. Of course the next question is why core is split out, especially since core's role is mostly for confidential company contacts and discipline. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > > --On Wednesday, November 28, 2007 08:20:04 -0800 "Joshua D. Drake" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>Core <-- this is obvious >>Committers <-- this is obvious the only question is it only >> committers to the source tree or do we want to give equal billing to >> the -www guys (I think yes to equal billing) > > Equal billing, but categorized ... for instance, Dave Page might be something > like: > > Dave Page (core, www) (where core reflects core server, not Core member) erm ? last i looked dave seemed to be a core member but not a (core) commiter ? :-) Stefan ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > I don't have a problem with that, but I think core code committers > > and www maintainers should be indentified separately. > > Why? Then we have to also separate advocacy which is just as important > and pgfoundry... as well as possibly a host of others. We all have our > job in the community :). > > > On a closely > > related note: last time I looked there was no way for anyone to > > discover on the web site who the committers actually are. That would > > also probably be useful. > > See Dave's response about core not wanting committers that easily > identified. I actually recall this argument, basically there are times > when commit access might be revoked temporarily etc... IIRC.. I believe the reason we don't publicise who is a committer is that we have non-committers who do a lot more for the project. Commit rights are usually given to people who do a lot of patches (perhaps small ones) while people who develop larger patches are less likely to get commit rights rapidly. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:06:58 -0400 "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > > > - --On Wednesday, November 28, 2007 08:20:04 -0800 "Joshua D. Drake" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Core <-- this is obvious > >Committers <-- this is obvious the only question is it only > > committers to the source tree or do we want to give equal billing to > > the -www guys (I think yes to equal billing) > > Equal billing, but categorized ... for instance, Dave Page might be > something like: > > Dave Page (core, www) (where core reflects core server, not Core > member) I am trying to make an evolutionary step that will work within the existing infrastructure. Based on Magnus's reply my solution requires heading changes and moving names around without anything else. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake - -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ UNIQUE NOT NULL Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHTb1vATb/zqfZUUQRAmDtAJ4pJjKr/b1p+2bnZ6TW/hQgaZ2VTQCgoz9r 0nrCvbM+2bXpSG3jU8AKFrg= =JupM -END PGP SIGNATURE- ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 - --On Wednesday, November 28, 2007 08:20:04 -0800 "Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Core <-- this is obvious >Committers <-- this is obvious the only question is it only > committers to the source tree or do we want to give equal billing to > the -www guys (I think yes to equal billing) Equal billing, but categorized ... for instance, Dave Page might be something like: Dave Page (core, www) (where core reflects core server, not Core member) >Hacker Emeritus Past contributions? Most definitely ... - Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSN . [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.orgICQ . 7615664 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFHTbxS4QvfyHIvDvMRAq4sAKDoUAhKsrHYPys7oeLyexUMyzHXewCffvZI D9i/ZWv84u5LBoXbSSv1ywI= =gBvn -END PGP SIGNATURE- ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 13:50:02 -0500 Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You are being overly sensitive. I never suggested otherwise. I simply > suggested that the roles people do in fact play should be public. And I was only pointing to a logistical problem with that thought process. You are a hacker, you are also a pgfoundry admin and buildfarm maintainer... Which list would you like to be under? Joshua D. Drake P.S. I know that answer, that isn't the point. - -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ UNIQUE NOT NULL Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHTbnnATb/zqfZUUQRAuIQAJ0fA5EEywJYT9dT2ymR2dzpDNvuigCdHAE2 oM8Byrl8TbB0P/Z6AcnFU1g= =hLFJ -END PGP SIGNATURE- ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
Joshua D. Drake wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 13:15:52 -0500 Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Joshua D. Drake wrote: Committers <-- this is obvious the only question is it only committers to the source tree or do we want to give equal billing to the -www guys (I think yes to equal billing) I don't have a problem with that, but I think core code committers and www maintainers should be indentified separately. Why? Then we have to also separate advocacy which is just as important and pgfoundry... as well as possibly a host of others. We all have our job in the community :). You are being overly sensitive. I never suggested otherwise. I simply suggested that the roles people do in fact play should be public. On a closely related note: last time I looked there was no way for anyone to discover on the web site who the committers actually are. That would also probably be useful. See Dave's response about core not wanting committers that easily identified. I actually recall this argument, basically there are times when commit access might be revoked temporarily etc... IIRC.. When I was made a committer, someone, I forget who, but I'm fairly sure it was some member of core, told me explicitly that it was intended to assist me professionally (and it has). That seems strangely at odds with a reluctance to publish the list of names of committers. It's not something I care deeply about, but it seems more than strange given that the list of active committers at least is not too hard to discover. cheers andrew ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 12:33:52 -0600 "Kevin Grittner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 11:34 AM, in message > >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > We don't generally add anybody who just provides a single patch, > > ever. They go in the release notes, but we only add people who've > > been around for a while to this list at all. > > I'm not sure what the point of the list is, but I had assumed that > one reason for publishing it was to show the scope of the community. > Wouldn't advocacy be better served by listing all the contributors, > even those who have contributed for the first time in that release? > > Is there some risk there that I'm missing, a matter of the effort > to gather the information, or to avoid offending more regular > contributors? Well to me, it is to acknowledge active community members which can be used as a tool for advocacy. A list that contains 3000 names does no one any good, we might as well just dump the mailing list subscribers :). However a reasonably managed list that shows strength in not only numbers but a solid base of frequent contributors, show duration and maturity within the project. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake > > -Kevin > > > > > ---(end of > broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the > PostgreSQL project by donating at > > http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate > - -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ UNIQUE NOT NULL Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHTbX9ATb/zqfZUUQRAkLRAJ0Z7tuxKPA1iBvI2I3l7Yvp10tl5QCgjFaO PEMjG6fWqdqXMY1RPnzWMhY= =ISYJ -END PGP SIGNATURE- ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
>>> On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 11:34 AM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We don't generally add anybody who just provides a single patch, ever. > They go in the release notes, but we only add people who've been around > for a while to this list at all. I'm not sure what the point of the list is, but I had assumed that one reason for publishing it was to show the scope of the community. Wouldn't advocacy be better served by listing all the contributors, even those who have contributed for the first time in that release? Is there some risk there that I'm missing, a matter of the effort to gather the information, or to avoid offending more regular contributors? -Kevin ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 13:15:52 -0500 Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Joshua D. Drake wrote: > >Committers <-- this is obvious the only question is it only > > committers to the source tree or do we want to give equal billing to > > the -www guys (I think yes to equal billing) > > > > > > I don't have a problem with that, but I think core code committers > and www maintainers should be indentified separately. Why? Then we have to also separate advocacy which is just as important and pgfoundry... as well as possibly a host of others. We all have our job in the community :). > On a closely > related note: last time I looked there was no way for anyone to > discover on the web site who the committers actually are. That would > also probably be useful. See Dave's response about core not wanting committers that easily identified. I actually recall this argument, basically there are times when commit access might be revoked temporarily etc... IIRC.. Sincerely, Joshua Drake - -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ UNIQUE NOT NULL Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHTbGmATb/zqfZUUQRAucRAJ9Xc3Rg7/rbyKD2BjuKJDOeIQaYBwCfbH31 xuLvWYGSfuM7O1DnI8HHK4k= =SrRN -END PGP SIGNATURE- ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
Joshua D. Drake wrote: Committers <-- this is obvious the only question is it only committers to the source tree or do we want to give equal billing to the -www guys (I think yes to equal billing) I don't have a problem with that, but I think core code committers and www maintainers should be indentified separately. On a closely related note: last time I looked there was no way for anyone to discover on the web site who the committers actually are. That would also probably be useful. cheers andrew ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 18:34:57 +0100 Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Now that seems reasonable. > > > > Core > > Regular contributors > > Occasional contributors > > Past contributors > > > > Core and Regular should be on the same page. > > Occasional and Past on another? (At a minimum we can't have Past on > > the same page it would get too large). > > Man, I'm glad I DB:ified that page a couple of months back :-P Me too... I wasn't looking forward to writing the patch ;) > > Do we really need separate pages, though? We already have the > distinction that major developers (in your case, that would be Regular > ones, I guess) are listed in full details, and other contributors are > just listed with name. I would be fine with that. > > I still think we should keep "Hackers Emeritus" (you may rename it). > The people on that list are way more than just "past contributors" > IMHO. *shrug* I don't really have a better name and I agree that we should give props so... Core Regular contributors Hackers Emeritus Occasional contributors Past contributors ??? > > > > I don't like major and minor because a one line patch that saves > > someone from loosing all there data is a major contribution but we > > may never hear from the person again. > > We don't generally add anybody who just provides a single patch, ever. > They go in the release notes, but we only add people who've been > around for a while to this list at all. I think, at least, but as has > already been told there are no strict policies... Fair enough but I think the point is still relevant, in that we really don't want to state specifically what a "Major" contributor is, I think it opens us up to more bad mojo than just saying you are either a regular contributor, or not :) Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake - -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ UNIQUE NOT NULL Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHTakTATb/zqfZUUQRAjVDAJ4qhlxToVRJ25jn0pumr9u4ZgX1tQCglFrv FY3HgczRhQwqzDcHPJuA5xk= =s+FQ -END PGP SIGNATURE- ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:53:43 + > Dave Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Joshua D. Drake wrote: >>> On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:27:42 + >>> Dave Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Why not Hackers? Noone is a 'member' of anything except core or mayber the web/infrastructure team. >>> Define Hacker. And I could argue that some are members of PGDG. >> Says he who only the other day muttered something about how PGDG >> wasn't a defined entity :-) > > I believe the term was "legal" entity (If it wasn't that is what I > should of wrote). Which is true. We are however a "community". > >>> What >>> about those who provide just as much time and energy in advocacy as >>> others do on -heackers? What about people that are working on >>> external projects only such as Slony or PLproxy? >> The latter are still hackers using the definition we're likely to >> agree on (ie. not a cracker). Both groups are 'Contributors' though. >> Maybe just use 'Regular contributors' and 'Occasional contributors'. >> Or major and minor. Or something entirely different. > > > Now that seems reasonable. > > Core > Regular contributors > Occasional contributors > Past contributors > > Core and Regular should be on the same page. > Occasional and Past on another? (At a minimum we can't have Past on > the same page it would get too large). Man, I'm glad I DB:ified that page a couple of months back :-P Do we really need separate pages, though? We already have the distinction that major developers (in your case, that would be Regular ones, I guess) are listed in full details, and other contributors are just listed with name. I still think we should keep "Hackers Emeritus" (you may rename it). The people on that list are way more than just "past contributors" IMHO. > I don't like major and minor because a one line patch that saves > someone from loosing all there data is a major contribution but we may > never hear from the person again. We don't generally add anybody who just provides a single patch, ever. They go in the release notes, but we only add people who've been around for a while to this list at all. I think, at least, but as has already been told there are no strict policies... //Magnus ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:53:43 + Dave Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:27:42 + > > Dave Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> Why not Hackers? Noone is a 'member' of anything except core or > >> mayber the web/infrastructure team. > > > > Define Hacker. And I could argue that some are members of PGDG. > > Says he who only the other day muttered something about how PGDG > wasn't a defined entity :-) I believe the term was "legal" entity (If it wasn't that is what I should of wrote). Which is true. We are however a "community". > > > What > > about those who provide just as much time and energy in advocacy as > > others do on -heackers? What about people that are working on > > external projects only such as Slony or PLproxy? > > The latter are still hackers using the definition we're likely to > agree on (ie. not a cracker). Both groups are 'Contributors' though. > Maybe just use 'Regular contributors' and 'Occasional contributors'. > Or major and minor. Or something entirely different. > Now that seems reasonable. Core Regular contributors Occasional contributors Past contributors Core and Regular should be on the same page. Occasional and Past on another? (At a minimum we can't have Past on the same page it would get too large). I don't like major and minor because a one line patch that saves someone from loosing all there data is a major contribution but we may never hear from the person again. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake - -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ UNIQUE NOT NULL Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHTZ3+ATb/zqfZUUQRAs0PAJ4nui/SBGaALAYQPGo5fN9SgQXnigCgpWGD t+lyk7oDx54Cz+6W4PjFwHI= =qsPR -END PGP SIGNATURE- ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:27:42 + > Dave Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Why not Hackers? Noone is a 'member' of anything except core or mayber >> the web/infrastructure team. > > Define Hacker. And I could argue that some are members of PGDG. Says he who only the other day muttered something about how PGDG wasn't a defined entity :-) > What > about those who provide just as much time and energy in advocacy as > others do on -heackers? What about people that are working on external > projects only such as Slony or PLproxy? The latter are still hackers using the definition we're likely to agree on (ie. not a cracker). Both groups are 'Contributors' though. Maybe just use 'Regular contributors' and 'Occasional contributors'. Or major and minor. Or something entirely different. /D ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:27:42 + Dave Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Actually we've previously agreed (in -core) that we do not want to > list committers for various reasons. Yeah, I know the list isn't too > hard to figure out, but we don't want to advertise it. Oh right, I actually recall that... > > >Members (really I think this should be contributors but then it > > is duplicative) > > Why not Hackers? Noone is a 'member' of anything except core or mayber > the web/infrastructure team. Define Hacker. And I could argue that some are members of PGDG. What about those who provide just as much time and energy in advocacy as others do on -heackers? What about people that are working on external projects only such as Slony or PLproxy? Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake - -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ UNIQUE NOT NULL Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHTZgrATb/zqfZUUQRAnS1AKCc/Nv3HmC+oX47GwBrXK9ChfoTaQCgitNG sGbIf6/G87bgwSiGEVCcacQ= =3StH -END PGP SIGNATURE- ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
"Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 13:58:27 + > Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> "Gregory Stark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> > "Josh Berkus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > >> >> All, >> >> >> >> Time for the annual update of this list: >> >>... >> >> Greg Stark, USA >> > >> > I'm not sure what the countries are supposed to signify but that's >> > neither the country I hail from nor where I'm currently living. >> >> Sorry, forgot to say what to put instead. I'll go with "Canada" -- >> it's more exotic :) > > I believe the list is where you are actually at. Aren't you in the UK > right now? Yep. That's fine with me too. Perhaps it's even better if there's any thought of using this list to drive the advocacy or user group efforts. -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com Ask me about EnterpriseDB's RemoteDBA services! ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Not to mention there don't seem to be any defined rules. I asked Berkus > and his reply was, "It has always been a little fuzzy". I asked Devrim > and he gave me 5 bullet points that don't quite make sense. Not sure what Devrim is referring to, but most often in the past Rob (or someone else) has proposed changes to -core which we've said yay or nay to. > Further I think this list is in the wrong place. It is > under /developers which to mean is most intuitive to information "for" > developers not a listing of them. Maybe. Where else would it go? > I think the listing should probably go under about/contributors and > under contributors would be: > >Core <-- this is obvious >Committers <-- this is obvious the only question is it only > committers to the source tree or do we want to give equal billing to > the -www guys (I think yes to equal billing) Actually we've previously agreed (in -core) that we do not want to list committers for various reasons. Yeah, I know the list isn't too hard to figure out, but we don't want to advertise it. >Members (really I think this should be contributors but then it is > duplicative) Why not Hackers? Noone is a 'member' of anything except core or mayber the web/infrastructure team. /D ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 13:58:27 + Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Gregory Stark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > "Josh Berkus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >> All, > >> > >> Time for the annual update of this list: > >>... > >> Greg Stark, USA > > > > I'm not sure what the countries are supposed to signify but that's > > neither the country I hail from nor where I'm currently living. > > Sorry, forgot to say what to put instead. I'll go with "Canada" -- > it's more exotic :) I believe the list is where you are actually at. Aren't you in the UK right now? Joshua D. Drake - -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ UNIQUE NOT NULL Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHTZXYATb/zqfZUUQRAmHiAKCtbqqBKQTMuA8jn0J/Kl+B357dLwCgp312 awpJs8KeGYnWVM+mQXyAVls= =/Lqi -END PGP SIGNATURE- ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 09:46:36 + Dave Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I should also point out that the contributor list has always included > people who have contributed to non-core community projects in the past > as well - psqlODBC, the JDBC driver, pgInstaller, pgAccess, pgAdmin, > infrastructure/web etc. so Josh's update should not necessarily > remove those people (though an argument could be made for giving > those people their own section). This list seems to be oddly designed anyway. Who is a developer? Is a developer different than a -hacker? Not to mention there don't seem to be any defined rules. I asked Berkus and his reply was, "It has always been a little fuzzy". I asked Devrim and he gave me 5 bullet points that don't quite make sense. Further I think this list is in the wrong place. It is under /developers which to mean is most intuitive to information "for" developers not a listing of them. I think the listing should probably go under about/contributors and under contributors would be: Core <-- this is obvious Committers <-- this is obvious the only question is it only committers to the source tree or do we want to give equal billing to the -www guys (I think yes to equal billing) Members (really I think this should be contributors but then it is duplicative) Hacker Emeritus Special Thanks (not sure about this, but basically this is "others") Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake - -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ UNIQUE NOT NULL Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHTZU3ATb/zqfZUUQRAoHMAJ4gwAkOshe9+PbusrcaECb2HgGr2wCeOzQX nY1eWHCq+NdV6F3DXvO3QXI= =4Jri -END PGP SIGNATURE- ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: > yeah well - the release notes do not make that good a reference on the > "who submitted patches" question anyway because the do not contain stuff > that are mere compile failures or add support for additional > platforms/cleanups) of new features (ie my patches to add GSSAPI support > to OpenBSD/Solaris or things full text command/tabcomplete support in > psql). > So in effect that list might more correctly be called a "feature > contributor list" Agreed - and that's exactly why Hiroshi got left off I think. His work included lots of testing and subsequent platform specific build fixes and code cleanup/fixes. I should also point out that the contributor list has always included people who have contributed to non-core community projects in the past as well - psqlODBC, the JDBC driver, pgInstaller, pgAccess, pgAdmin, infrastructure/web etc. so Josh's update should not necessarily remove those people (though an argument could be made for giving those people their own section). /D ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
Dave Page wrote: Josh Berkus wrote: All, Time for the annual update of this list: http://www.postgresql.org/developer/bios Here's the list of people I gleaned from the release notes (btw, if people have countries for the folks who aren't attributed, I'd appreciate them). Of course, there are many contributors to essential non-core code who should be listed as well: Hiroshi Saito has made a number of smaller but important contributions this cycle. Heikki is from Finland, but currently living in the UK. You also missed my name despite it being attributed to 3 items in the release notes, but I don't suppose that matters as I'm in the core section anyway. yeah well - the release notes do not make that good a reference on the "who submitted patches" question anyway because the do not contain stuff that are mere compile failures or add support for additional platforms/cleanups) of new features (ie my patches to add GSSAPI support to OpenBSD/Solaris or things full text command/tabcomplete support in psql). So in effect that list might more correctly be called a "feature contributor list" Stefan ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
Josh Berkus wrote: > All, > > Time for the annual update of this list: > http://www.postgresql.org/developer/bios > > Here's the list of people I gleaned from the release notes (btw, if people > have countries for the folks who aren't attributed, I'd appreciate them). > Of course, there are many contributors to essential non-core code who > should be listed as well: Hiroshi Saito has made a number of smaller but important contributions this cycle. Heikki is from Finland, but currently living in the UK. You also missed my name despite it being attributed to 3 items in the release notes, but I don't suppose that matters as I'm in the core section anyway. /D ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Time to update list of contributors
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 16:08:36 -0800 Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > All, > > Time for the annual update of this list: > http://www.postgresql.org/developer/bios > > Here's the list of people I gleaned from the release notes (btw, if > people have countries for the folks who aren't attributed, I'd > appreciate them). Of course, there are many contributors to essential > non-core code who should be listed as well: It would be useful to know the requirements to be listed... Joshua D. Drake > > Tom Lane, USA > Peter Eisentraut, Germany > Bruce Momjian, USA > Simon Riggs, England > Pavan Deolasee, India > Itagaki Takahiro, Japan > Greg Smith, USA > David Fetter, USA > Pavel Stehule, Czech > Greg Stark, USA > Heikki Linnakangas > Oleg Bartunov, Russia > Florian Pflug > Jeff Davis, USA > Trevor Hardcastle > Nikhil S > Holdger Schurig > D'Arcy Cain, Canada > Gevik Babakhani, Netherlands > Teodor Sigaev, Russia > Alvaro Herrera, Chile > Mark Kirkwood, New Zealand > Joachim Wieland > Henry Hotz, USA > Magnus Haeglander, Sweden > Tatsuo Ishii, Japan > Victor Wagner > Bill Moran, USA > Andrew Dunstan, USA > Arul Shaji > Nickolay Samokhvalov, Russia > Neil Conway, Canada > Marc Fournier, Canada > Jaime Casanova, Venezuala > Albert Cervera > Bernd Helmle > Glen Parker > Jan Wieck, USA > Steve Marshall > Paul Bayer > Doug Knight > Greg Sabino Mullane, USA > Chad Wagner > Brendan Jurd > Euler Taviera de Oliveira, Brazil > Joe Conway, USA > Michael M., Germany > Guillaume Smet, France > Mark Cotner > Chris Marcellino, Italy > Dave Cramer, Canada > Devrim Gunduz, Turkey > Jeremy Drake > Marko Kreen, Estonia > Kris Jurka, Finland > Tom Dunstan, USA > - -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ UNIQUE NOT NULL Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHTLMdATb/zqfZUUQRApmWAKCn35/NMsxIPbb0zVOEOIPwBftthQCdE5bH 0KRAB/zHwywwy0hVZx2f1zg= =7QdJ -END PGP SIGNATURE- ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
