PostgreSQL Europe Partners

Hi there,

while renewing my membership to the association, I visited the
website and noticed in the "Sponsors" page that currently two companies
are considered partners (http://www.postgresql.eu/sponsors/).

I want to clarify that I do not want to discuss the legitimity of
those two partners (I do agree that they have contributed), I rather
want to focus on the process that's been followed, purely for
transaparency reasons.

I would encourage the board/management to add more information on the
website about the process for becoming a "Partner" of the association,
given that it is not described in the "Statute". For example: sponsoring
two/three Postgres conferences in a row, contributing X man-hours a
year, voting in a board meeting, etc.

I believe a small paragraph or a page describing the process would be
enough.

Thank you.

Cheers,
Gabriele

--
Gabriele Bartolini - 2ndQuadrant Italia
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
gabriele(dot)bartolini(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)it | www.2ndQuadrant.it

On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Gabriele Bartolini
<gabriele(dot)bartolini(at)2ndquadrant(dot)it> wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> while renewing my membership to the association, I visited the website and
> noticed in the "Sponsors" page that currently two companies are considered
> partners (http://www.postgresql.eu/sponsors/).

Ugh. I think that page has been pretty much unmaintained for a while
:( Those partner logos are there because of contractual requirements
for pgday 2009, which had an unfortunate wording in it there.

For now, I'll remove them. Then we can consider the points you make
below as well.

> I want to clarify that I do not want to discuss the legitimity of those
> two partners (I do agree that they have contributed), I rather want to focus
> on the process that's been followed, purely for transaparency reasons.
>
> I would encourage the board/management to add more information on the
> website about the process for becoming a "Partner" of the association, given
> that it is not described in the "Statute". For example: sponsoring two/three
> Postgres conferences in a row, contributing X man-hours a year, voting in a
> board meeting, etc.

Yeah. The thing is that we don't actually *have* any. The whole
contents, except for the links, came to be from some unfortunate
contract wording, which is no longer being used.

However.

Suggestions for a good definition and process to use are most welcome
- and once we have one, it should certainly be published!

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

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

Hi there,

Le 27/08/2012 16:40, Magnus Hagander a écrit :
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Gabriele Bartolini
> <gabriele(dot)bartolini(at)2ndquadrant(dot)it> wrote:
>> Hi there,
>>
>> while renewing my membership to the association, I visited the
>> website and noticed in the "Sponsors" page that currently two
>> companies are considered partners
>> (http://www.postgresql.eu/sponsors/).
>
> Ugh. I think that page has been pretty much unmaintained for a
> while :( Those partner logos are there because of contractual
> requirements for pgday 2009, which had an unfortunate wording in it
> there.

Yep. I remember that clearly yes.

> For now, I'll remove them.

I'd prefer you wait for consent of interested parties. In other terms,
EnterpriseDB and Dalibo. Let's say me as the CEO for the latest part :D

FYI, I sent already the questions to my associates (dalibo team) and
we will have the answer shortly...

> Then we can consider the points you make below as well.

I fully agree with Gabriele tought. This has to be clarified !

>> I want to clarify that I do not want to discuss the legitimity of
>> those two partners (I do agree that they have contributed), I
>> rather want to focus on the process that's been followed, purely
>> for transaparency reasons.

And you're right.

>> I would encourage the board/management to add more information on
>> the website about the process for becoming a "Partner" of the
>> association, given that it is not described in the "Statute". For
>> example: sponsoring two/three Postgres conferences in a row,
>> contributing X man-hours a year, voting in a board meeting, etc.
>
> Yeah. The thing is that we don't actually *have* any. The whole
> contents, except for the links, came to be from some unfortunate
> contract wording, which is no longer being used.

Yes. But this contract, exists, and we have to cope with it.

Be sure Dalibo won't be a power of resistance tought. You all know
here I am fully a "pro" when it's about transparency.

> However.
>
> Suggestions for a good definition and process to use are most
> welcome - and once we have one, it should certainly be published!

How do we work on this topic, now it seems to be re-opened ?

Cheers,

- --
Jean-Paul Argudo
www.PostgreSQL.(fr|eu)
www.Dalibo.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlA7iNMACgkQ+Vr/BD3wuUT+CQCgu5Kf1E1CGqk9cN0L2IzVHfTU
qAgAoLDX3slmVIdSuSuori/OgsJG1LNj
=gTVD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Jean-Paul Argudo
<jean-paul(at)postgresqlfr(dot)org> wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> Le 27/08/2012 16:40, Magnus Hagander a écrit :
>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Gabriele Bartolini
>> <gabriele(dot)bartolini(at)2ndquadrant(dot)it> wrote:
>>> Hi there,
>>>
>>> while renewing my membership to the association, I visited the
>>> website and noticed in the "Sponsors" page that currently two
>>> companies are considered partners
>>> (http://www.postgresql.eu/sponsors/).
>>
>> Ugh. I think that page has been pretty much unmaintained for a
>> while :( Those partner logos are there because of contractual
>> requirements for pgday 2009, which had an unfortunate wording in it
>> there.
>
> Yep. I remember that clearly yes.
>
>> For now, I'll remove them.
>
> I'd prefer you wait for consent of interested parties. In other terms,
> EnterpriseDB and Dalibo. Let's say me as the CEO for the latest part :D

The contract only says until the end of 2009. Which was, ahem, a while
ago. So it can safely be removed now, and has been.

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

Hi Magnus,

Il 27/08/12 16:40, Magnus Hagander ha scritto:
> Yeah. The thing is that we don't actually *have* any. The whole
> contents, except for the links, came to be from some unfortunate
> contract wording, which is no longer being used.
I see. Thanks for the answer
> However. Suggestions for a good definition and process to use are most
> welcome - and once we have one, it should certainly be published!
I would not see anything wrong if the board decided to recognise for a
company's contribution. However, I think it is easier to define some
annual sponsorship agreements.

Cheers,
Gabriele

--
Gabriele Bartolini - 2ndQuadrant Italia
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
gabriele(dot)bartolini(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)it | www.2ndQuadrant.it

On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Gabriele Bartolini
<gabriele(dot)bartolini(at)2ndquadrant(dot)it> wrote:
> Hi Magnus,
>
> Il 27/08/12 16:40, Magnus Hagander ha scritto:
>
>> Yeah. The thing is that we don't actually *have* any. The whole contents,
>> except for the links, came to be from some unfortunate contract wording,
>> which is no longer being used.
>
> I see. Thanks for the answer
>
>> However. Suggestions for a good definition and process to use are most
>> welcome - and once we have one, it should certainly be published!
>
> I would not see anything wrong if the board decided to recognise for a
> company's contribution. However, I think it is easier to define some annual
> sponsorship agreements.

I agree that's acceptable - but as you say, there should be a
published policy for why and how :)

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

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

Le 27/08/2012 16:53, Magnus Hagander a écrit :
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Jean-Paul Argudo
> <jean-paul(at)postgresqlfr(dot)org> wrote:
>> Hi there,
>>
>> Le 27/08/2012 16:40, Magnus Hagander a écrit :
>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Gabriele Bartolini
>>> <gabriele(dot)bartolini(at)2ndquadrant(dot)it> wrote:
>>>> Hi there,
>>>>
>>>> while renewing my membership to the association, I visited
>>>> the website and noticed in the "Sponsors" page that currently
>>>> two companies are considered partners
>>>> (http://www.postgresql.eu/sponsors/).
>>>
>>> Ugh. I think that page has been pretty much unmaintained for a
>>> while :( Those partner logos are there because of contractual
>>> requirements for pgday 2009, which had an unfortunate wording
>>> in it there.
>>
>> Yep. I remember that clearly yes.
>>
>>> For now, I'll remove them.
>>
>> I'd prefer you wait for consent of interested parties. In other
>> terms, EnterpriseDB and Dalibo. Let's say me as the CEO for the
>> latest part :D
>
> The contract only says until the end of 2009. Which was, ahem, a
> while ago. So it can safely be removed now, and has been.

Verified. So this close the topic. Thanks for the removal :)

Now we can move on :)

My proposal:

As for the moment pgconf.eu is the only event sponsorised, we could
add a kind of matrix with each company // each year, and the level of
sponsorship in the cells, and/or the amount given in terms of money.

We could also add another table with credits to all people that
participated in terms of time given for each of these events.

Finaly, we could also ask our donators (and yes, we have many) if they
want to appear on this kind of page or not.

What you think ?

- --
Jean-Paul Argudo
www.PostgreSQL.(fr|eu)
www.Dalibo.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlA7i/wACgkQ+Vr/BD3wuURSVQCfQqOBMLwYOxqIWPqkeXzgYYbq
VJYAoOi+t0nsNGe7LNbzBbsKtSGMrg1n
=Ise/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----