Thread: PG "Users" page?
Hi us, Just noticed that our Featured Users page has “Sun Microsystems” listed: https://www.postgresql.org/about/users/ (Under “Technology” at the bottom) Should we update that to say “Oracle” :D … or maybe just nuke that entry? Regards and best wishes, Justin Clift -- "My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the first group; there was less competition there." - Indira Gandhi
> On 11 Sep 2016, at 16:55, Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> wrote: > > Hi us, > > Just noticed that our Featured Users page has “Sun Microsystems” listed: > > https://www.postgresql.org/about/users/ > (Under “Technology” at the bottom) > > Should we update that to say “Oracle” :D … or maybe just nuke that entry? That page is completely unmaintained. I proposed removing it a couple of years back, but was met with strong objections coupledwith a complete lack of volunteers to actually do the work to keep it up to date. I strongly feel it should be removed still - it is probably responsible for 25% of emails to webmaster@ from random companiesrequesting inclusion.
On 11 Sep 2016, at 17:14, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: >> On 11 Sep 2016, at 16:55, Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> wrote: >> >> Hi us, >> >> Just noticed that our Featured Users page has “Sun Microsystems” listed: >> >> https://www.postgresql.org/about/users/ >> (Under “Technology” at the bottom) >> >> Should we update that to say “Oracle” :D … or maybe just nuke that entry? > > That page is completely unmaintained. I proposed removing it a couple of years back, but was met with strong objectionscoupled with a complete lack of volunteers to actually do the work to keep it up to date. > > I strongly feel it should be removed still - it is probably responsible for 25% of emails to webmaster@ from random companiesrequesting inclusion. Do they seem like legit requests, or more like companies not really using PG? If it seems like the 2nd, maybe we could have a policy like this? “We’re happy to include any company here who actively helps out on our mailing lists, and describes in detail their PostgreSQL usage on their website.” That’s coming from a “lets set a high bar to meet” perspective, which might help weed out nuisance requests. :) Regards and best wishes, Justin Clift -- "My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the first group; there was less competition there." - Indira Gandhi
On 11 Sep 2016, at 17:27, Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> wrote: > On 11 Sep 2016, at 17:14, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: >>> On 11 Sep 2016, at 16:55, Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> wrote: >>> >>> Hi us, >>> >>> Just noticed that our Featured Users page has “Sun Microsystems” listed: >>> >>> https://www.postgresql.org/about/users/ >>> (Under “Technology” at the bottom) >>> >>> Should we update that to say “Oracle” :D … or maybe just nuke that entry? >> >> That page is completely unmaintained. I proposed removing it a couple of years back, but was met with strong objectionscoupled with a complete lack of volunteers to actually do the work to keep it up to date. >> >> I strongly feel it should be removed still - it is probably responsible for 25% of emails to webmaster@ from random companiesrequesting inclusion. > > Do they seem like legit requests, or more like companies not really using > PG? > > If it seems like the 2nd, maybe we could have a policy like this? > > “We’re happy to include any company here who actively helps out on > our mailing lists, and describes in detail their PostgreSQL usage > on their website.” > > That’s coming from a “lets set a high bar to meet” perspective, which > might help weed out nuisance requests. :) Thinking more into the lack of website volunteers, maybe the above concept should include “actively helps out with our website” too? + Justin -- "My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the first group; there was less competition there." - Indira Gandhi
> On 11 Sep 2016, at 17:27, Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> wrote: > > On 11 Sep 2016, at 17:14, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: >>> On 11 Sep 2016, at 16:55, Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> wrote: >>> >>> Hi us, >>> >>> Just noticed that our Featured Users page has “Sun Microsystems” listed: >>> >>> https://www.postgresql.org/about/users/ >>> (Under “Technology” at the bottom) >>> >>> Should we update that to say “Oracle” :D … or maybe just nuke that entry? >> >> That page is completely unmaintained. I proposed removing it a couple of years back, but was met with strong objectionscoupled with a complete lack of volunteers to actually do the work to keep it up to date. >> >> I strongly feel it should be removed still - it is probably responsible for 25% of emails to webmaster@ from random companiesrequesting inclusion. > > Do they seem like legit requests, or more like companies not really using > PG? > > If it seems like the 2nd, maybe we could have a policy like this? > > “We’re happy to include any company here who actively helps out on > our mailing lists, and describes in detail their PostgreSQL usage > on their website.” > > That’s coming from a “lets set a high bar to meet” perspective, which > might help weed out nuisance requests. :) Oh, I'm sure the majority are legit. The point is that it's a 'Featured' user page, not just a random list of users whichwould be so incomplete and, well, random, that it would have little use. A featured list requires assessment of requests, some sort of inclusion criteria, and one or more people to deal with allthat, make the decision and update the site. We're generally pretty bad at doing that sort of thing. > > Regards and best wishes, > > Justin Clift > > -- > "My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those > who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the > first group; there was less competition there." > - Indira Gandhi >
> > >> On 11 Sep 2016, at 17:27, Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> wrote: >> >> On 11 Sep 2016, at 17:14, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: >>>> On 11 Sep 2016, at 16:55, Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi us, >>>> >>>> Just noticed that our Featured Users page has “Sun Microsystems” >>>> listed: >>>> >>>> https://www.postgresql.org/about/users/ >>>> (Under “Technology” at the bottom) >>>> >>>> Should we update that to say “Oracle” :D … or maybe just nuke that >>>> entry? >>> >>> That page is completely unmaintained. I proposed removing it a couple >>> of years back, but was met with strong objections coupled with a >>> complete lack of volunteers to actually do the work to keep it up to >>> date. >>> >>> I strongly feel it should be removed still - it is probably responsible >>> for 25% of emails to webmaster@ from random companies requesting >>> inclusion. >> >> Do they seem like legit requests, or more like companies not really >> using >> PG? >> >> If it seems like the 2nd, maybe we could have a policy like this? >> >> “We’re happy to include any company here who actively helps out on >> our mailing lists, and describes in detail their PostgreSQL usage >> on their website.” >> >> That’s coming from a “lets set a high bar to meet” perspective, which >> might help weed out nuisance requests. :) > > Oh, I'm sure the majority are legit. The point is that it's a 'Featured' > user page, not just a random list of users which would be so incomplete > and, well, random, that it would have little use. > > A featured list requires assessment of requests, some sort of inclusion > criteria, and one or more people to deal with all that, make the decision > and update the site. We're generally pretty bad at doing that sort of > thing. > Uhmmm, Who have all the information? Who knows the way on how to check the information? This is point!!! -- Saludos, Gilberto Castillo ETECSA, La Habana, Cuba
On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 6:14 PM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
--
> On 11 Sep 2016, at 16:55, Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> wrote:
>
> Hi us,
>
> Just noticed that our Featured Users page has “Sun Microsystems” listed:
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/about/users/
> (Under “Technology” at the bottom)
>
> Should we update that to say “Oracle” :D … or maybe just nuke that entry?
That page is completely unmaintained. I proposed removing it a couple of years back, but was met with strong objections coupled with a complete lack of volunteers to actually do the work to keep it up to date.
I strongly feel it should be removed still - it is probably responsible for 25% of emails to webmaster@ from random companies requesting inclusion.
Given that it really isn't being maintained, and that it actually takes a decent amount of time for somebody to maintain it in a way to make it actually *valuable* to visitors, I'll give a strong +1 for removing it.
If we want just a list of users, we could do that and make it self-service (meaning you just sign up and fill in your details - like we have for professional services). But that's something very different from being a featured user.
On Sep 12, 2016, at 8:49 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 6:14 PM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
> On 11 Sep 2016, at 16:55, Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> wrote:
>
> Hi us,
>
> Just noticed that our Featured Users page has “Sun Microsystems” listed:
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/about/users/
> (Under “Technology” at the bottom)
>
> Should we update that to say “Oracle” :D … or maybe just nuke that entry?
That page is completely unmaintained. I proposed removing it a couple of years back, but was met with strong objections coupled with a complete lack of volunteers to actually do the work to keep it up to date.
I strongly feel it should be removed still - it is probably responsible for 25% of emails to webmaster@ from random companies requesting inclusion.Given that it really isn't being maintained, and that it actually takes a decent amount of time for somebody to maintain it in a way to make it actually *valuable* to visitors, I'll give a strong +1 for removing it.
+1
If we want just a list of users, we could do that and make it self-service (meaning you just sign up and fill in your details - like we have for professional services). But that's something very different from being a featured user.
+1 - but it goes back to Dave’s point of lack of criteria for how users get listed, even if we make it self-signup. We would probably want to moderate it similar to the self-published content to avoid spam, etc.
Le 12.09.2016 16:53, Jonathan S. Katz a écrit : >> On Sep 12, 2016, at 8:49 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> >> wrote: >> >> On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 6:14 PM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> >> wrote: >> >>>> On 11 Sep 2016, at 16:55, Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi us, >>>> >>>> Just noticed that our Featured Users page has “Sun >>> Microsystems” listed: >>>> >>>> https://www.postgresql.org/about/users/ [1] >>>> (Under “Technology” at the bottom) >>>> >>>> Should we update that to say “Oracle” :D … or maybe just >>> nuke that entry? >>> >>> That page is completely unmaintained. I proposed removing it a >>> couple of years back, but was met with strong objections coupled >>> with a complete lack of volunteers to actually do the work to keep >>> it up to date. >>> >>> I strongly feel it should be removed still - it is probably >>> responsible for 25% of emails to webmaster@ from random companies >>> requesting inclusion. >> >> Given that it really isn't being maintained, and that it actually >> takes a decent amount of time for somebody to maintain it in a way >> to make it actually *valuable* to visitors, I'll give a strong +1 >> for removing it. > > +1 > >> If we want just a list of users, we could do that and make it >> self-service (meaning you just sign up and fill in your details - >> like we have for professional services). But that's something very >> different from being a featured user. > > +1 - but it goes back to Dave’s point of lack of criteria for how > users get listed, even if we make it self-signup. We would probably > want to moderate it similar to the self-published content to avoid > spam, etc. > > I think that such a list served its purpose 10 years ago when people were asking "Who's using PostgreSQL ?" . But we're way beyond that now. My experience is that PostgreSQL is used almost everywhere (at least in France) and the question is more "What can I do with PostgreSQL ?" A list of company names (no matter how big they are) doesn't say much about how PostgreSQL is used inside these companies. Access is used in many companies too... So instead of long list of names or logos, I think I'd be more powerful to have 3 or 4 curated usecases for the most frequently asked situations : * A Multi-Terabytes database * An Oracle to Postgres migration success story * A mission-critical application * A nosql example Each usecase doesn't have to be very long. 1500 characters would be enough I think. And the 4 usecases could be found easily... The hard part is to update the page on a regular basis because a usecase can get old very quickly. Currently the postgresql.org "case studies" page is even worse than the "users" page : https://www.postgresql.org/about/casestudies/ Some studies in there were written in 2003.... This is a very bad message. Like for the "users" page, it should be removed until someone takes the time to gather relevant and up-to-date info. Maybe one way to do it would be to continue the work done on the "case study" page : https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Case_Study_Links Every time one of us sees a PostgreSQL use case in the media, on a blog or a conference, he/she adds it to the wiki. And then once a year, someone cherrypicks the best exemples to be featured on the website. I'm not saying it's easy but that's the most realistic approach I can imagine. -- -- Damien Clochard
On 13/09/16 23:51, Damien Clochard wrote: > Le 12.09.2016 16:53, Jonathan S. Katz a écrit : >>> On Sep 12, 2016, at 8:49 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> >>> wrote: >>> >>> On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 6:14 PM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>> On 11 Sep 2016, at 16:55, Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi us, >>>>> >>>>> Just noticed that our Featured Users page has “Sun >>>> Microsystems” listed: >>>>> >>>>> https://www.postgresql.org/about/users/ [1] >>>>> (Under “Technology” at the bottom) >>>>> >>>>> Should we update that to say “Oracle” :D … or maybe just >>>> nuke that entry? >>>> >>>> That page is completely unmaintained. I proposed removing it a >>>> couple of years back, but was met with strong objections coupled >>>> with a complete lack of volunteers to actually do the work to keep >>>> it up to date. >>>> >>>> I strongly feel it should be removed still - it is probably >>>> responsible for 25% of emails to webmaster@ from random companies >>>> requesting inclusion. >>> >>> Given that it really isn't being maintained, and that it actually >>> takes a decent amount of time for somebody to maintain it in a way >>> to make it actually *valuable* to visitors, I'll give a strong +1 >>> for removing it. >> >> +1 >> >>> If we want just a list of users, we could do that and make it >>> self-service (meaning you just sign up and fill in your details - >>> like we have for professional services). But that's something very >>> different from being a featured user. >> >> +1 - but it goes back to Dave’s point of lack of criteria for how >> users get listed, even if we make it self-signup. We would probably >> want to moderate it similar to the self-published content to avoid >> spam, etc. >> >> > > I think that such a list served its purpose 10 years ago when people > were asking "Who's using PostgreSQL ?" . But we're way beyond that now. > My experience is that PostgreSQL is used almost everywhere (at least in > France) and the question is more "What can I do with PostgreSQL ?" > > A list of company names (no matter how big they are) doesn't say much > about how PostgreSQL is used inside these companies. Access is used in > many companies too... > > So instead of long list of names or logos, I think I'd be more powerful > to have 3 or 4 curated usecases for the most frequently asked situations : > > * A Multi-Terabytes database > * An Oracle to Postgres migration success story > * A mission-critical application > * A nosql example > > Each usecase doesn't have to be very long. 1500 characters would be > enough I think. And the 4 usecases could be found easily... The hard > part is to update the page on a regular basis because a usecase can get > old very quickly. > +1 to this, the success stories have much bigger impact (especially if backed by well known company), lists mean nothing as everything is used by everybody nowadays. -- Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
On 13 Sep 2016, at 22:51, Damien Clochard <damien@dalibo.info> wrote: <snip> > Currently the postgresql.org "case studies" page is even worse than the "users" page : > > https://www.postgresql.org/about/casestudies/ > > Some studies in there were written in 2003.... This is a very bad message. Like for the "users" page, it should be removeduntil someone takes the time to gather relevant and up-to-date info. Yeah. It was a good start to things back in the day, but people ran out of time/effort to update it. :/ > Maybe one way to do it would be to continue the work done on the "case study" page : > > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Case_Study_Links > > Every time one of us sees a PostgreSQL use case in the media, on a blog or a conference, he/she adds it to the wiki. Andthen once a year, someone cherrypicks the best exemples to be featured on the website. > > I'm not saying it's easy but that's the most realistic approach I can imagine. Interesting approach. That would lead to a curated list fairly decently. :) The entries on that page at the moment are a bit old, but that’s fixable. With these two VMware blog posts from a few months ago: https://blogs.vmware.com/vsphere/2016/03/getting-comfortable-with-vpostgres-and-the-vcenter-server-appliance-part-1.html https://blogs.vmware.com/vsphere/2016/05/getting-comfortable-with-vpostgres-and-the-vcenter-server-appliance-part-2.html They seem like a decent fit for the page. They’re the one’s describing why VMware vCenter is moving from Windows+(MSSQL/Oracle) to a self contained Linux+PostgreSQL appliance. Thinking a new “Virtualisation” heading, and putting them there? Regards and best wishes, Justin Clift -- "My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the first group; there was less competition there." - Indira Gandhi