> -----Original Message-----
> From: Justin Clift [mailto:justin@postgresql.org]
> Sent: 04 December 2002 10:59
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: Peter Eisentraut; Marc G. Fournier; Bruce Momjian;
> PostgreSQL-development
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] PostgreSQL Global
> Development Group Announces
>
>
> > I'll preempt the 'this was all discussed on -advocacy, you
> should have
> > been there' response with yet another agreement with Vince
> :-) - I too
> > am getting far too much mail these days and another list is
> the last
> > thing I need.
>
> Ok then, what do you suggest?
Not sure, but we do need to define the roles of the groups and keep them
seperate as much as possible otherwise some of us are gonna overload.
I'm sure Vince will have something to say about this, but it seems to me
that advocacy should define what the <urgh>marketing</urgh> plan should
be, and should look like, then the www people should implement it.
Having the www people maintaining most sites, then the advocacy people
doing their own thing seperately is a recipe for trouble. Think about
how this would work in a commercial organisation - you would not have
the web team sitting in on all the marketing meetings.
We also have the advantage that our marketing people (== advocacy) are
technically knowledgable and will not make idiots of themselves on a
regular basis by asking us for impossible things - unlike your regular
run-of-the-mill marketing drones :-)
Regards, Dave.
