Fair large change to contributors

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello,

O.k. patch is attached, it looks pretty good on my sandbox but will
welcome feedback. The specifics are below:

* Removes developers/bios
* Creates community/contributors
* Removes core (per Bruce M)
* Adds Active Contributors
* Adds Occasional Contributors

The following DML needs to be run as well:

update developers_types set sortorder = 1 where type = 3;
update developers set type = '3' where type = '1';
update developers_types set extrainfo = 'The following individuals are active contributors to the project. You will generally find them active on the lists, working on features or supporting the PostgreSQL.org infrastructure.' where type = '3';

- --

=== 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)

iD8DBQFHVNrLATb/zqfZUUQRAvq2AKCNJTbzFVMWJL2MrpR/As/d9N3ToACgkzM7
bVYFNeRZJE3GjSw3GmfS1pQ=
=/08r
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

- --On Monday, December 03, 2007 20:42:48 -0800 "Joshua D. Drake"
<jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hello,
>
> O.k. patch is attached, it looks pretty good on my sandbox but will
> welcome feedback. The specifics are below:
>
> * Removes developers/bios
> * Creates community/contributors
> * Removes core (per Bruce M)

So, if core is taken out, how do ppl know who is on core?

Your definition of Core "I have always considered core a steering committee
type of deal." is right on the ball ... when it comes time to do releases,
beta's etc ... all that is first discussed on Core before going to anywhere
else ...

Not sure where Bruce gets his "mostly for confidential company contacts and
discipline.", but I'm not sure when the last time was we dealt with any
'discipline', nor any 'confidential company contacts' *shrug* Actually, for
the later, I'd say Greatbridge was the only time we've dealt with *that* ...

- ----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email . scrappy(at)hub(dot)org MSN . scrappy(at)hub(dot)org
Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFHVN374QvfyHIvDvMRAgbHAKCQ8j/PJOJubfWlrXjSfdLOV0PfegCbBB1Q
qPiVO1YXWxHQwGcusGsAguQ=
=ui/B
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> * Removes core (per Bruce M)

Say what?

regards, tom lane

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 00:56:27 -0400
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> wrote:

> > * Removes developers/bios
> > * Creates community/contributors
> > * Removes core (per Bruce M)
>
> So, if core is taken out, how do ppl know who is on core?

Well I assumed we would update the specific contributor description,
which can be done from a web interface as I understand... so for you it
would be:

Core member, helps coordinates the entire effort, helps administer the
postgresql.org websites, mailing lists, ftp site, and source code
repository.

> Not sure where Bruce gets his "mostly for confidential company
> contacts and discipline.", but I'm not sure when the last time was we

Well I can see the confidential company contact. I get that too as the
Liaison. Companies will contact me "confidentially" about possibly
helping the project. I also *know* that Berkus gets those types of
contacts.

> dealt with any 'discipline', nor any 'confidential company contacts'
> *shrug* Actually, for the later, I'd say Greatbridge was the only
> time we've dealt with *that* ...

Depends on exactly what he means by discipline. Core finally stepping
up on the naming argument could fall into that.

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)

iD8DBQFHVOOFATb/zqfZUUQRAgicAJ0b2hV5H2z4DgxXds03g+7kKLf5/QCfclFT
k7E3417fgjm/5UXfeH+8tjc=
=hU7P
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 00:09:41 -0500
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> > * Removes core (per Bruce M)
>
> Say what?

heh... It removes the "Core" categorization from the contributors and
just places them directly into the Active Contributors. Per my response
to Marc Core would thus be designated from the description.

/note I am not arguing this change just stating what I did. I made the
change because Bruce brought it up and it makes the page a lot simpler.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the
> postmaster
>

- --

=== 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)

iD8DBQFHVOSpATb/zqfZUUQRAkHrAJ9VQS9vlEJuL9PhxBn/9vKuPNIL6wCeKGvT
nAFsyPEc6eo/fhCy8Ikrx7s=
=AAXn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

- --On Monday, December 03, 2007 21:20:05 -0800 "Joshua D. Drake"
<jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:

>> dealt with any 'discipline', nor any 'confidential company contacts'
>> *shrug* Actually, for the later, I'd say Greatbridge was the only
>> time we've dealt with *that* ...
>
> Depends on exactly what he means by discipline. Core finally stepping
> up on the naming argument could fall into that.

I would have classified that as assuming our role as 'steering committee'
myself ...

- ----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email . scrappy(at)hub(dot)org MSN . scrappy(at)hub(dot)org
Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFHVOXs4QvfyHIvDvMRAqlbAKCvyap67fkSZRehzHUcxfGxul2hHwCaA1LD
KYGS6v3Y5bCJJuUaag+XhJ4=
=ZdBg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

- --On Monday, December 03, 2007 21:24:57 -0800 "Joshua D. Drake"
<jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 00:09:41 -0500
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
>> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>> > * Removes core (per Bruce M)
>>
>> Say what?
>
> heh... It removes the "Core" categorization from the contributors and
> just places them directly into the Active Contributors. Per my response
> to Marc Core would thus be designated from the description.
>
> /note I am not arguing this change just stating what I did.
> I made the
> change because Bruce brought it up and it makes the page a lot simpler.

Please remove that part of the patch ... Bruce's opinion does not reflect the
rest of Core's, it was just his opinion ...

... even with Bruce's opinion about how little Core does (another thing that
does'nt reflect the rest of Core's opinion), those "confidential company
contacts" need to know we exist, and having to search for the string 'core' in
all of the active contributors seems to be a negative approach to this ...

- ----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email . scrappy(at)hub(dot)org MSN . scrappy(at)hub(dot)org
Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFHVOdV4QvfyHIvDvMRAuJcAJ9+eqUzDjNQzgRTVeIQc/Ys1iuDWwCgnuVT
5oz/wwblZm3HB2yhZDSz2JU=
=LsTZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 01:36:21 -0400
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1

> > /note I am not arguing this change just stating what I did.
> > I made the
> > change because Bruce brought it up and it makes the page a lot
> > simpler.
>
> Please remove that part of the patch ... Bruce's opinion does not
> reflect the rest of Core's, it was just his opinion ...

The patch won't make that change.. the DML will.

>
> ... even with Bruce's opinion about how little Core does (another
> thing that does'nt reflect the rest of Core's opinion), those
> "confidential company contacts" need to know we exist, and having to
> search for the string 'core' in all of the active contributors seems
> to be a negative approach to this ...

*shrug* it is as simple as changing an entries "type"...

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)

iD8DBQFHVOyeATb/zqfZUUQRAt2xAJ0VD5yH2B1U9pxz8PW87R0EysGHVwCfYGd8
r4iznytimHQ+FVRFlfeRAx8=
=pyNg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 20:42:48 -0800
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hello,
>
> O.k. patch is attached, it looks pretty good on my sandbox but will
> welcome feedback. The specifics are below:
>
> * Removes developers/bios
> * Creates community/contributors
> * Removes core (per Bruce M)
> * Adds Active Contributors
> * Adds Occasional Contributors
>
> The following DML needs to be run as well:
>
> update developers_types set sortorder = 1 where type = 3;
> update developers set type = '3' where type = '1';
> update developers_types set extrainfo = 'The following individuals
> are active contributors to the project. You will generally find them
> active on the lists, working on features or supporting the
> PostgreSQL.org infrastructure.' where type = '3';
>

I missed a dml:

update developers_types set typename = 'Active contributors' where type = '3';
update developers_types set typename = 'Occasional contributors' where type = '4';

If we don't put in the core inclusion part then we just don't do this:

update developers set type = '3' where type = '1';

And we will have to do this instead:

update developers_types set sortorder = 2 where type = 3;

Anyway, I would be curious to know what other core members think...

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)

iD8DBQFHVO0yATb/zqfZUUQRAiJzAJ0TS8zWSWwSeA6Sly1fWu2SVEbhTwCeNXMr
a6iscRr/zq3C1FuocUNyy0Y=
=NqYr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 22:01:22 -0800
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>

FYI you can see what this looks like here:

http://69.34.217.90/community/contributors

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)

iD8DBQFHVO8sATb/zqfZUUQRAoAOAJsEB4vjkkhSrC8x0Kc9lv5KE4z9DQCgkA2s
mPlxnGAqb6VDJmAPgSAbyYI=
=QUPo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Hello,
>
> O.k. patch is attached, it looks pretty good on my sandbox but will
> welcome feedback. The specifics are below:
>
> * Removes developers/bios
> * Creates community/contributors
> * Removes core (per Bruce M)

You what?

/D

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Anyway, I would be curious to know what other core members think...

I agree with Marc. The Core section should not be removed.

I find it slightly amusing that you've done that, yet left a dedicated
section for Hackers Emeritus.

/D

On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 08:42:48PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hello,
>
> O.k. patch is attached, it looks pretty good on my sandbox but will
> welcome feedback. The specifics are below:
>
> * Removes developers/bios
> * Creates community/contributors
> * Removes core (per Bruce M)
> * Adds Active Contributors
> * Adds Occasional Contributors

Couple of comments, apart from the obvious "let's not drop -core":

* I suggest we leave it at the old URL as well, and not remove it. For ppl
coming in from old links. It can still be community section, and it can
still have a different title, though

* Let's not delete the old developer.php file and create a new identical
one. Modify the one that's there instead. Filenames don't have to match,
that's what the dispatcher takes care of.

* You added a new template, but didn't remove the old one. My suggestion -
keep the old one, don't add the new one.

//Magnus

Hi,

On Tue, 2007-12-04 at 08:47 +0000, Dave Page wrote:
> > Anyway, I would be curious to know what other core members think...
>
> I agree with Marc. The Core section should not be removed.

+1 from me...
--
Devrim GÜNDÜZ , RHCE
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/

Josh,

>ends on exactly what he means by discipline. Core finally stepping
> up on the naming argument could fall into that.

Yeah, except that apparently everyone decided that I was wrong to do that.

--Josh

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hello,
>
> O.k. patch is attached, it looks pretty good on my sandbox but will
> welcome feedback. The specifics are below:
>
> * Removes developers/bios
> * Creates community/contributors
> * Removes core (per Bruce M)
> * Adds Active Contributors
> * Adds Occasional Contributors

I'm not clear on why we're overhauling the contributors page. What's
wrong with the old format?

I'm not necessarily objecting to your changes, but you should probably
explain the reasoning behind them.

--Josh

On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 04:44:16PM +0530, Josh Berkus wrote:
> >ends on exactly what he means by discipline. Core finally stepping
> >up on the naming argument could fall into that.
>
> Yeah, except that apparently everyone decided that I was wrong to do that.

Really? I haven't heard anybody complaining that -core finally spoke up on
that. For the record, *I* think it was very good that you did.

(assuming we're talking about the same thing - postgres vs postgresql,
right?)

//Magnus

Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 04:44:16PM +0530, Josh Berkus wrote:
>>> ends on exactly what he means by discipline. Core finally stepping
>>> up on the naming argument could fall into that.
>> Yeah, except that apparently everyone decided that I was wrong to do that.
>
> Really? I haven't heard anybody complaining that -core finally spoke up on
> that. For the record, *I* think it was very good that you did.

exactly that's my thought too ...

Stefan

Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 08:42:48PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> O.k. patch is attached, it looks pretty good on my sandbox but will
>> welcome feedback. The specifics are below:
>>
>> * Removes developers/bios
>> * Creates community/contributors
>> * Removes core (per Bruce M)
>> * Adds Active Contributors
>> * Adds Occasional Contributors
>
> Couple of comments, apart from the obvious "let's not drop -core":
>
> * I suggest we leave it at the old URL as well, and not remove it. For ppl
> coming in from old links. It can still be community section, and it can
> still have a different title, though

This should be a redirect, which I can put in place with PHP. We should
not duplicate content like that.

>
> * Let's not delete the old developer.php file and create a new identical
> one. Modify the one that's there instead. Filenames don't have to match,
> that's what the dispatcher takes care of.

That would be inconsistent with the rest of the portal layout.

>
> * You added a new template, but didn't remove the old one. My suggestion -
> keep the old one, don't add the new one.

I should remove the old one. I must of missed it, sorry.

Joshua D. Drake

>
>
> //Magnus
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
>

Dave Page wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Anyway, I would be curious to know what other core members think...
>
> I agree with Marc. The Core section should not be removed.
>
> I find it slightly amusing that you've done that, yet left a dedicated
> section for Hackers Emeritus.

That is what was discussed :). Again, keep in mind the patch doesn't do
any of this. It is all controlled by the DML in the developers_* tables.

Joshua D. Drake

>
> /D
>

Josh Berkus wrote:
> Josh,
>
> >ends on exactly what he means by discipline. Core finally stepping
>> up on the naming argument could fall into that.
>
> Yeah, except that apparently everyone decided that I was wrong to do that.

You didn't, Dave Page did if I recall. I am not talking about your
Advocacy coup ;)

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

>
> --Josh
>

Hello,

In summary for this patch. The patch does not change the display of the
contributors except to move it to /community (where it belongs imo).
What controls the display of the contributors is the database.

If we want to keep core at top, just don't change type 1 to type 3 where
type = 1. Core will remain in place at the top. (I already posted about
this but I think people glossed over it since it was late).

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Hello,
>
> In summary for this patch. The patch does not change the display of the
> contributors except to move it to /community (where it belongs imo).
> What controls the display of the contributors is the database.
>
> If we want to keep core at top, just don't change type 1 to type 3 where
> type = 1. Core will remain in place at the top. (I already posted about
> this but I think people glossed over it since it was late).

It's not that we glossed over anything, but that the entire proposal was
being considered rather than just the specifics of what the patch did
vs. the DML.

/D

Dave Page wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> In summary for this patch. The patch does not change the display of the
>> contributors except to move it to /community (where it belongs imo).
>> What controls the display of the contributors is the database.
>>
>> If we want to keep core at top, just don't change type 1 to type 3 where
>> type = 1. Core will remain in place at the top. (I already posted about
>> this but I think people glossed over it since it was late).
>
> It's not that we glossed over anything, but that the entire proposal was
> being considered rather than just the specifics of what the patch did
> vs. the DML.

Except the "patch" doesn't remove core ;)... Anyway, I am not trying to
argue semantics. My point is if the patch is applied as is without
modification to the DML, the page is going to look just like the
existing developers page, just under community.

Depending on "what" DML is applied will effect the display of that page
dramatically.

It seems at lease core consensus :P is to not remove their position at
the top of the page, which I don't really care about so.... don't apply
that update.

I would still like to apply:

update developers_types set typename = 'Active contributors' where type
= '3';
update developers_types set typename = 'Occasional contributors' where
type = '4';

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

>
> /D
>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello,

O.k. part deux:

BEGIN;
UPDATE developers_types SET typename = 'Active Contributors'
WHERE type = '3';
UPDATE developers_types SET typename = 'Occasional Contributors'
WHERE type = '4';
UPDATE developers_types SET extrainfo = 'The following individuals are
active contributors to the project. You will generally find them active
on the lists, working on features or supporting the PostgreSQL.org
infrastructure.' WHERE type = '3';
COMMIT;

Added Developer Profiles link back to developers. It is just a
placeholder as it just points to community/contributors but will allow
links to not be broken.

Added core back.

Changed the above using SQL.

Attached.

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)

iD8DBQFHVbaAATb/zqfZUUQRAu4wAJ9IrGCWyq6tDvVcJuxQYyODSbgBcgCfStS7
iYgCqt48onLQvpV5tnk+BYI=
=k8O/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Monday 03 December 2007 23:42, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Hello,
>
> O.k. patch is attached, it looks pretty good on my sandbox but will
> welcome feedback. The specifics are below:
> * Adds Active Contributors
> * Adds Occasional Contributors
>

I'm not sure what reasoning spawned this change, but I would object to it
myself, mostly on grounds that the people in those lists have been
categorized on significance of their contribution (Major), not frequency of
it (Active).

On a side note, whilst everyone has been discussing reshaping the lists in
thier own vision, I think what has been fairly overlooked is the task of
shuffling some of our Majors and Others between those two categories (at
least I always thought that was an important part when I was maintaining the
information, I'm not sure what the current ideas behind the thing are)

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

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 23:44:30 -0500
Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> wrote:

> On Monday 03 December 2007 23:42, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > O.k. patch is attached, it looks pretty good on my sandbox but will
> > welcome feedback. The specifics are below:
> > * Adds Active Contributors
> > * Adds Occasional Contributors
> >
>
> I'm not sure what reasoning spawned this change, but I would object
> to it myself, mostly on grounds that the people in those lists have
> been categorized on significance of their contribution (Major), not
> frequency of it (Active).

Major is quantitatively more subjective than Active.

>
> On a side note, whilst everyone has been discussing reshaping the
> lists in thier own vision, I think what has been fairly overlooked is
> the task of shuffling some of our Majors and Others between those two
> categories (at least I always thought that was an important part when
> I was maintaining the information, I'm not sure what the current
> ideas behind the thing are)

My understanding and this is implicit as I was never told so I am
making a complete assumption here, is that it was Josh Berkus's
responsibility.

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)

iD8DBQFHVi+8ATb/zqfZUUQRAs03AKCDzu8UGutH6M7F/GU233IPGzloUgCdFwUt
19fV79CTkEy5CeHMuX//oPE=
=+yK6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
>> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> In summary for this patch. The patch does not change the display of the
>>> contributors except to move it to /community (where it belongs imo).
>>> What controls the display of the contributors is the database.
>>>
>>> If we want to keep core at top, just don't change type 1 to type 3 where
>>> type = 1. Core will remain in place at the top. (I already posted about
>>> this but I think people glossed over it since it was late).
>>
>> It's not that we glossed over anything, but that the entire proposal was
>> being considered rather than just the specifics of what the patch did
>> vs. the DML.
>
> Except the "patch" doesn't remove core ;)... Anyway, I am not trying to
> argue semantics. My point is if the patch is applied as is without
> modification to the DML, the page is going to look just like the
> existing developers page, just under community.

Well, +1 to database this.

Can you hack us something together for donors, too? ;-)

--Josh

Josh Berkus wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Dave Page wrote:
>>> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>>> Hello,

>> Except the "patch" doesn't remove core ;)... Anyway, I am not trying
>> to argue semantics. My point is if the patch is applied as is without
>> modification to the DML, the page is going to look just like the
>> existing developers page, just under community.
>
> Well, +1 to database this.

Uhmmm it is databased.

>
> Can you hack us something together for donors, too? ;-)
>

It's on the list. I understand how the code works now.

Joshua D. Drake

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 23:44:30 -0500
> Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> wrote:
>
>> On Monday 03 December 2007 23:42, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> O.k. patch is attached, it looks pretty good on my sandbox but will
>>> welcome feedback. The specifics are below:
>>> * Adds Active Contributors
>>> * Adds Occasional Contributors
>>>
>> I'm not sure what reasoning spawned this change, but I would object
>> to it myself, mostly on grounds that the people in those lists have
>> been categorized on significance of their contribution (Major), not
>> frequency of it (Active).
>
> Major is quantitatively more subjective than Active.

It is. But with just active/inactive, you give the same level of
attention to say Heikki or Pavan as you do to someone who sends in a
one-line patch for a README?

One thing that's important though - if we do change this, we need to
recategorise people at the same time. We can't just rename "major" to
"recent" and then move people around at a later time.

>> On a side note, whilst everyone has been discussing reshaping the
>> lists in thier own vision, I think what has been fairly overlooked is
>> the task of shuffling some of our Majors and Others between those two
>> categories (at least I always thought that was an important part when
>> I was maintaining the information, I'm not sure what the current
>> ideas behind the thing are)
>
> My understanding and this is implicit as I was never told so I am
> making a complete assumption here, is that it was Josh Berkus's
> responsibility.

Nope. As long as I can remember it's been Rob who made the changes, and
he then sent them past -core for approval before it was actually put on
the site. Berkus was certainly part of the approval process as a member
of -core, but AFAIK he didn't actuallyi make the changes.

//Magnus

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 21:24:11 +0100
Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:

> > Major is quantitatively more subjective than Active.
>
> It is. But with just active/inactive, you give the same level of
> attention to say Heikki or Pavan as you do to someone who sends in a
> one-line patch for a README?

You are forgetting Occasional :)

>
> One thing that's important though - if we do change this, we need to
> recategorise people at the same time. We can't just rename "major" to
> "recent" and then move people around at a later time.

In general I think that Active/Major is applicable and replaceable on
the current list. There are certainly omissions Stefan for example
which need to be remedied but I think everyone could agree that those
changes could be submitted shortly after the patch is accepted.

My primary concern is the removal of the word developer. I would be
reasonably happy with "Major contributors", "Minor contributor".

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)

iD8DBQFHVwsJATb/zqfZUUQRAlC0AKCVpZBs7pQmz7bQkCHtDu6cmQJgnQCgrrss
uXlOThc0OePXUaW8QErq/2c=
=26zF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Joshua D. Drake wrote:

> My primary concern is the removal of the word developer. I would be
> reasonably happy with "Major contributors", "Minor contributor".

What problem do you have with developers?

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/5ZYLFMCVHXC
"I dream about dreams about dreams", sang the nightingale
under the pale moon (Sandman)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 17:40:28 -0300
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:

> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> > My primary concern is the removal of the word developer. I would be
> > reasonably happy with "Major contributors", "Minor contributor".
>
> What problem do you have with developers?

It doesn't accurately represent all contributors.

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)

iD8DBQFHVw2CATb/zqfZUUQRAgy9AJ4o36+DDeZXb03PB0F6nwiRVzLHEQCgm+ES
JCC7VhbJf/QB1JYTDvr2TsA=
=0ncF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> One thing that's important though - if we do change this, we need to
>> recategorise people at the same time. We can't just rename "major" to
>> "recent" and then move people around at a later time.
>
> In general I think that Active/Major is applicable and replaceable on
> the current list. There are certainly omissions Stefan for example
> which need to be remedied but I think everyone could agree that those
> changes could be submitted shortly after the patch is accepted.
>
> My primary concern is the removal of the word developer. I would be
> reasonably happy with "Major contributors", "Minor contributor".

I'm fine with that. And I agree that we need to recognise
non-developer-contributors. Either by renaming it to contributors, or by
creating separate sections for developers and "other contributors". But
creating separate sections creates the problem of how to deal with
people who are both. So I think renaming it is a good solution.

//Magnus

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 21:48:02 +0100
Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:

In an effort to remain productive... please see attached patch.

Also required:

BEGIN;
UPDATE developers_types SET typename = 'Major Contributors'
WHERE type = 3;
UPDATE developers_types SET typename = 'Minor Contributors'
WHERE type = 4;
COMMIT;

There are no new files, only modification to existing ones. I also
added a rewrite rule to .htaccess. The rule works but I am unsure

I will say that Magnus/Stefans (wrong :P) way results in a smaller
patch.

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)

iD8DBQFHVxXDATb/zqfZUUQRAg6vAJsHWZsYaKV6iRxjD0dK3Isn92G0nACeJeSp
X5ALSlNQqrjPSVLjLorkQUY=
=mbLK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Wed, 2007-12-05 at 13:18 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 21:48:02 +0100
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>
> In an effort to remain productive... please see attached patch.
>
> Also required:
>
> BEGIN;
> UPDATE developers_types SET typename = 'Major Contributors'
> WHERE type = 3;
> UPDATE developers_types SET typename = 'Minor Contributors'
> WHERE type = 4;
> COMMIT;
>
> There are no new files, only modification to existing ones. I also
> added a rewrite rule to .htaccess. The rule works but I am unsure
>
> I will say that Magnus/Stefans (wrong :P) way results in a smaller
> patch.
>

As I think I said on IM, the rewrite rule part is bogus, really. It
needs to get out on the static frontends, and just putting it there
doesn't do that - it only affects wwwmaster. And for that, it really
*is* easier to just accept the old URL still ;-)

It needs to go in portal/tools/htaccess/root. I can take a look at doing
this if you don't want to, but not right now (you *really* need to test
stuff going in there, we've had some serious breakage from bad patches
there before)

Other than that, I obviously like this patch much better ;)

//Magnus

On Sun, 2007-12-09 at 12:27 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-12-05 at 13:18 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 21:48:02 +0100
> > Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> >
> > In an effort to remain productive... please see attached patch.
> >
> > Also required:
> >
> > BEGIN;
> > UPDATE developers_types SET typename = 'Major Contributors'
> > WHERE type = 3;
> > UPDATE developers_types SET typename = 'Minor Contributors'
> > WHERE type = 4;
> > COMMIT;
> >
> > There are no new files, only modification to existing ones. I also
> > added a rewrite rule to .htaccess. The rule works but I am unsure
> >
> > I will say that Magnus/Stefans (wrong :P) way results in a smaller
> > patch.
> >
>
> As I think I said on IM, the rewrite rule part is bogus, really. It
> needs to get out on the static frontends, and just putting it there
> doesn't do that - it only affects wwwmaster. And for that, it really
> *is* easier to just accept the old URL still ;-)
>
> It needs to go in portal/tools/htaccess/root. I can take a look at doing
> this if you don't want to, but not right now (you *really* need to test
> stuff going in there, we've had some serious breakage from bad patches
> there before)

Pah. I looked at the wrong end of the patch. I see now that you have
that part actually in the patch :-) My bad, please ignore.

//Magnus

On Wed, 2007-12-05 at 13:18 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 21:48:02 +0100
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>
> In an effort to remain productive... please see attached patch.

Patch applied.

I also noticed you didn't change the actual title of the page, just the
headline. I assume that was a mistake, and fixed it.

You also missed the in-text link at the main developers page :-P

//Magnus

Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-12-05 at 13:18 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 21:48:02 +0100
>> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>>
>> In an effort to remain productive... please see attached patch.
>
> Patch applied.

Y'know, I'm still not so convinced about the new headings - 'Minor
contributors' is the one that irks me.

Consider that that section includes:

Greg Stark - CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY, var-valena and lots more
Thomas Hallgren - Pl/Java
Francisco Figueiredo - Npgsql
Christopher Browne - Significant work and ongoing maintenance of Slony
Heikki Linnakangas - 2PC, major review work, concurrent scan, LDC

Amongst others, none of which I think it is fair to call 'minor'. Now
some of those should clearly move up into the main section (though thats
another discussion), but I think we should reconsider that title. How
about 'Other contributors'?

Thoughts?

/D

Dave Page a écrit :
> Amongst others, none of which I think it is fair to call 'minor'. Now
> some of those should clearly move up into the main section (though thats
> another discussion)

AFAICS, the page was not updated with 8.3 contributions. So they were
"minor" contributors before 8.3 dev cycle. It's obvious some of them
have become major during the 8.3 dev cycle.

> but I think we should reconsider that title. How
> about 'Other contributors'?

Why not simply 'Contributors'?

--
Guillaume

Dave Page wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Wed, 2007-12-05 at 13:18 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 21:48:02 +0100
>>> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>>>
>>> In an effort to remain productive... please see attached patch.
>>
>> Patch applied.
>
> Y'know, I'm still not so convinced about the new headings - 'Minor
> contributors' is the one that irks me.
>
> Consider that that section includes:
>
> Greg Stark - CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY, var-valena and lots more
> Thomas Hallgren - Pl/Java
> Francisco Figueiredo - Npgsql
> Christopher Browne - Significant work and ongoing maintenance of Slony
> Heikki Linnakangas - 2PC, major review work, concurrent scan, LDC
>
> Amongst others, none of which I think it is fair to call 'minor'. Now
> some of those should clearly move up into the main section (though thats
> another discussion), but I think we should reconsider that title. How
> about 'Other contributors'?
>
> Thoughts?

Yeah, I wasn't entirely convinced about that one. It used to be called
"other contributors", so I'd be fine with moving that one back.

//Magnus

On Sunday 09 December 2007 09:21, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
> > Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >> On Wed, 2007-12-05 at 13:18 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >>> Hash: SHA1
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 21:48:02 +0100
> >>> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> In an effort to remain productive... please see attached patch.
> >>
> >> Patch applied.
> >
> > Y'know, I'm still not so convinced about the new headings - 'Minor
> > contributors' is the one that irks me.
> >
> > Consider that that section includes:
> >
> > Greg Stark - CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY, var-valena and lots more
> > Thomas Hallgren - Pl/Java
> > Francisco Figueiredo - Npgsql
> > Christopher Browne - Significant work and ongoing maintenance of Slony
> > Heikki Linnakangas - 2PC, major review work, concurrent scan, LDC
> >
> > Amongst others, none of which I think it is fair to call 'minor'. Now
> > some of those should clearly move up into the main section (though thats
> > another discussion), but I think we should reconsider that title. How
> > about 'Other contributors'?
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> Yeah, I wasn't entirely convinced about that one. It used to be called
> "other contributors", so I'd be fine with moving that one back.
>

+1

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

Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-12-05 at 13:18 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

> It needs to go in portal/tools/htaccess/root. I can take a look at doing
> this if you don't want to, but not right now (you *really* need to test
> stuff going in there, we've had some serious breakage from bad patches
> there before)

My root file has:

RewriteRule ^developer/bios /community/contributors [L,R=301]

???

Joshua D. Drake

Magnus Hagander wrote:

>> It needs to go in portal/tools/htaccess/root. I can take a look at doing
>> this if you don't want to, but not right now (you *really* need to test
>> stuff going in there, we've had some serious breakage from bad patches
>> there before)
>
> Pah. I looked at the wrong end of the patch. I see now that you have
> that part actually in the patch :-) My bad, please ignore.

:)

Joshua D. Drake

Dave Page wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Wed, 2007-12-05 at 13:18 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>> Hash: SHA1
>
> Amongst others, none of which I think it is fair to call 'minor'. Now

They were minor developers before :P. Keep in mind that they can be
moved and it is "easy" to add another section.

> some of those should clearly move up into the main section (though thats
> another discussion), but I think we should reconsider that title. How
> about 'Other contributors'?

I would consider Other less than Minor but I do get your point. I am not
sure if there would be better wording than the one you suggest.

Wait... how about just Contributor..

Core
Major Contributor
Hackers Em...
Contributor

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> some of those should clearly move up into the main section (though
>> thats another discussion), but I think we should reconsider that
>> title. How about 'Other contributors'?
>
> I would consider Other less than Minor but I do get your point. I am not
> sure if there would be better wording than the one you suggest.
>
> Wait... how about just Contributor..

+1

//Magnus

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 22:01:22 -0800
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
>
> FYI you can see what this looks like here:
>
> http://69.34.217.90/community/contributors

I am thinking "Hackers Emeritus" should move down near "Past
Contributors". Its current location seems odd.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > /note I am not arguing this change just stating what I did.
> > I made the
> > change because Bruce brought it up and it makes the page a lot simpler.
>
> Please remove that part of the patch ... Bruce's opinion does not reflect the
> rest of Core's, it was just his opinion ...
>
> ... even with Bruce's opinion about how little Core does (another thing that
> does'nt reflect the rest of Core's opinion), those "confidential company
> contacts" need to know we exist, and having to search for the string 'core' in
> all of the active contributors seems to be a negative approach to this ...

Here is my post asking if the core section was necessary:

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-11/msg01234.php

It is true my description of core as incomplete, as it didn't list
confidential security and tarball creation.

However, having core at the top might imply that core does most of the
work for this project, which I don't think is true.

One idea would be to list the core members at the top in one sentence,
and have their details below. But maybe core-at-the-top is the best of
our possible options.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

Bruce Momjian wrote:

> One idea would be to list the core members at the top in one sentence,
> and have their details below. But maybe core-at-the-top is the best of
> our possible options.

My impression is that core (in general) is a little sensitive about
their position on that page. I didn't care enough to make the argument
one way or another because I know that core is subject to the community.

However, your point is also valid in that the current representation
makes it look like core is somehow the key to the kingdom, which is
certainly not true.

I do not wish to detract from the importance of core either though. Part
of me thinks the page should look like this:

Core (link to page with core members)
* Definition of core, purpose etc....
Major Contributors (link to page with Major Contributors and Contributors)

* Definition
Contributors

* Definition
Hackers Emeritus (Link to page with Hackers Emeritus and Past Contributors)

* Definition
Past Contributors

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

- --On Sunday, December 16, 2007 08:09:42 -0800 "Joshua D. Drake"
<jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:

> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>> One idea would be to list the core members at the top in one sentence,
>> and have their details below. But maybe core-at-the-top is the best of
>> our possible options.
>
> My impression is that core (in general) is a little sensitive about their
> position on that page. I didn't care enough to make the argument one way or
> another because I know that core is subject to the community.
>
> However, your point is also valid in that the current representation makes it
> look like core is somehow the key to the kingdom, which is certainly not true.
>
> I do not wish to detract from the importance of core either though. Part of
> me thinks the page should look like this:
>
> Core (link to page with core members)
> * Definition of core, purpose etc....
> Major Contributors (link to page with Major Contributors and Contributors)
>
> * Definition
> Contributors
>
> * Definition
> Hackers Emeritus (Link to page with Hackers Emeritus and Past Contributors)
>
> * Definition
> Past Contributors

I like the 'Link to listing' idea myself ... keeps that main page 'nice and
short' ...

- ----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email . scrappy(at)hub(dot)org MSN . scrappy(at)hub(dot)org
Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD)

iD4DBQFHZXzZ4QvfyHIvDvMRAi20AJdKxZVgsHB7edd+Gc9OELrxYzjwAKCyGV/J
y52n7D9rOxuYXjozVjDAHA==
=H2sr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>> One idea would be to list the core members at the top in one sentence,
>> and have their details below. But maybe core-at-the-top is the best of
>> our possible options.
>
> My impression is that core (in general) is a little sensitive about
> their position on that page. I didn't care enough to make the argument
> one way or another because I know that core is subject to the community.
>
> However, your point is also valid in that the current representation
> makes it look like core is somehow the key to the kingdom, which is
> certainly not true.
>
> I do not wish to detract from the importance of core either though. Part
> of me thinks the page should look like this:
>
> Core (link to page with core members)

I don't like the split-into-a-bunch-of-tiny-pages idea. The page isn't
large enough to require that yet, IMHO. And there's space for definition
as well, as long as it's nice and short (which it should be).

> * Definition of core, purpose etc....

+1 on actually defining that so outsiders can know about it. You'll just
have to get -core to agree on a wording for it though :-P

//Magnus

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

- --On Sunday, December 16, 2007 20:36:54 +0100 Magnus Hagander
<magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:

>> Core (link to page with core members)
>
> I don't like the split-into-a-bunch-of-tiny-pages idea. The page isn't
> large enough to require that yet, IMHO. And there's space for definition
> as well, as long as it's nice and short (which it should be).
>
>
>> * Definition of core, purpose etc....
>
> +1 on actually defining that so outsiders can know about it. You'll just
> have to get -core to agree on a wording for it though :-P

We've already been discussing that :) Haven't got anything yet, mind you ...

- ----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email . scrappy(at)hub(dot)org MSN . scrappy(at)hub(dot)org
Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFHZYSO4QvfyHIvDvMRAqJpAKCJSPiekcPdv8cmlgXIqsUuWAGupQCgrZo9
ZhIWe7JZ3STp935mDbtwhAU=
=mucb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian wrote:

>> I do not wish to detract from the importance of core either though. Part
>> of me thinks the page should look like this:
>>
>> Core (link to page with core members)
>
> I don't like the split-into-a-bunch-of-tiny-pages idea. The page isn't
> large enough to require that yet, IMHO. And there's space for definition
> as well, as long as it's nice and short (which it should be).

One option would be that the second page would be as it is now but have
internal refs. That way we have the short front page but solve the
second page is too short problem.

With that could even come in page navigation on top of each list that
allows navigation between the various topics.

>
>
>> * Definition of core, purpose etc....
>
> +1 on actually defining that so outsiders can know about it. You'll just
> have to get -core to agree on a wording for it though :-P
>

:)

Joshua D. Drake

Marc G. Fournier wrote:

>>> * Definition of core, purpose etc....
>> +1 on actually defining that so outsiders can know about it. You'll just
>> have to get -core to agree on a wording for it though :-P
>
> We've already been discussing that :) Haven't got anything yet, mind you ...

I assume since about 1996? :P

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake