On Thursday 30 August 2007 14:22, Dave Page wrote:
> > ------- Original Message -------
> > From: "Selena Deckelmann" <selenamarie@gmail.com>
> > To: "Dave Page" <dpage@postgresql.org>, "Joshua D. Drake"
> > <jd@commandprompt.com>, "Magnus Hagander" <magnus@hagander.net>,
> > "PostgreSQL Advocacy List" <pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org> Sent:
> > 30/08/07, 19:02:35
> > Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] PostgreSQL.Org (was: PostgreSQL Conference
> > Fal l 2007)
> >
> > On 8/30/07, Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org> wrote:
> > > I am. What I object to is declaring this as a postgresql.org conference
> > > when it hasn't been generally agreed in an appropriate community forum
> > > (which would be -advocacy imho). Doing so effectively allows *anyone*
> > > to organise an event and call it 'official' - which I believe is
> > > definitely not something we want for a whole heap of reasons.
> >
> > I would like for this to be an 'official' event.
> >
> > How do we go about getting 'official' approval?
>
> There is no formal process (yet), but I would suggest that general
> agreement (or lack of disagreement) of this forum (-advocacy) that the
> organisers are well enough known to be trusted and the proposed event is
> appropriate.
>
> Personally I have no doubts on either point in this instance, given that
> you and JD are involved. Anyone disagree?
>
Slightly.... Dan was well known in the community and had a well known list of
community members on his organizing committee, yet that was not seen as an
official conference as far as pgdg was concerned, so I'd guess the "official"
answer to her questions would be:
The postgresql project does not run/endorse/promote any specific conference as
an official postgresql conference, despite any claims from promoters to the
contrary. Similar to training and certification, there are many 3rd parties
that offer these services; we recommend you evaluate them on thier own
merits.
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
