Thread: PostgreSQL Certification

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

Hey guys,

Myself and a small team of PostgreSQL contributors have started a new
community project for PostgreSQL Certification. It is just launching
but we wanted to get it out there so that people can join in on the
discussion now :).

For more information please visit:

http://www.postgresqlcertification.org/

Joshua D. Drake

- -- 
The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/ 
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director |  PostgreSQL political pundit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHoPdMATb/zqfZUUQRAqhlAJ92rMzYpn+k4rGDXpd4WiZwJQcBNACfWNeg
0zPBFRb4yc6Idpj99PCcFbY=
=Spdr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Josh,

> Myself and a small team of PostgreSQL contributors have started a new
> community project for PostgreSQL Certification. It is just launching
> but we wanted to get it out there so that people can join in on the
> discussion now :).

Who else is in this?  Have you talked to the Venezualan folks?  SRA?

As you know, I'm strongly in favor of a good, generally respected
certification.  Let's get all of the interested folks on one project.

--Josh

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

On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:17:43 -0800
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:

Current broadcast members are:

Myself
Magnus
Robert
Chander (need to get him on the website)

Bruce has a pending invitation (which I didn't send yet)

I have not spoken with SRA or the Venezualan folks but am more than
happy to have them involved.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake
- -- 
The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/ 
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director |  PostgreSQL political pundit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHoPiMATb/zqfZUUQRAqMHAJsHop8kUqHkHRLJMjNFBIny+dIiYQCfXz19
fXELUEQ3khSifVR6JJaI3K8=
=N1BL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Josh,

> I have not spoken with SRA or the Venezualan folks but am more than
> happy to have them involved.

OK, I'll get you some contact info.

--Josh

Can you show us the goals of the PostgreSQL Certification ?
I always voted for the united PostgreSQL Certification program
(amin, developer) we could promote with the help of commercial companies.
In my opinion, common certificate, valid in all countries will be much more
useful than buttons. We have several good authors who can be sponsored to
write certification courses with the help of developers.

Oleg
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hey guys,
>
> Myself and a small team of PostgreSQL contributors have started a new
> community project for PostgreSQL Certification. It is just launching
> but we wanted to get it out there so that people can join in on the
> discussion now :).
>
> For more information please visit:
>
> http://www.postgresqlcertification.org/
>
> Joshua D. Drake
>
> - --
> The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/
> PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
> Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
> PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director |  PostgreSQL political pundit
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFHoPdMATb/zqfZUUQRAqhlAJ92rMzYpn+k4rGDXpd4WiZwJQcBNACfWNeg
> 0zPBFRb4yc6Idpj99PCcFbY=
> =Spdr
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
>

     Regards,
         Oleg
_____________________________________________________________
Oleg Bartunov, Research Scientist, Head of AstroNet (www.astronet.ru),
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University, Russia
Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
phone: +007(495)939-16-83, +007(495)939-23-83

Josh Berkus wrote:
> Josh,
>
>> Myself and a small team of PostgreSQL contributors have started a new
>> community project for PostgreSQL Certification. It is just launching
>> but we wanted to get it out there so that people can join in on the
>> discussion now :).
>
> Who else is in this?  Have you talked to the Venezualan folks?  SRA?
>
> As you know, I'm strongly in favor of a good, generally respected
> certification.  Let's get all of the interested folks on one project.

You may know that I'm part of the BSD Certification Group.  Proper
certification is not a trivial project.  I joined up.

--
Dan Langille - http://www.langille.org/
BSDCan - The Technical BSD Conference: http://www.bsdcan.org/
PGCon  - The PostgreSQL Conference:    http://www.pgcon.org/

Josh Berkus wrote:
> Josh,
>
>> Myself and a small team of PostgreSQL contributors have started a new
>> community project for PostgreSQL Certification. It is just launching
>> but we wanted to get it out there so that people can join in on the
>> discussion now :).
>
> Who else is in this?  Have you talked to the Venezualan folks?  SRA?
>
> As you know, I'm strongly in favor of a good, generally respected
> certification.  Let's get all of the interested folks on one project.
>

Am i automatically disqualified by asking who "the Venezualan folks" are?

b

> Josh,
>
> > Myself and a small team of PostgreSQL contributors have started a new
> > community project for PostgreSQL Certification. It is just launching
> > but we wanted to get it out there so that people can join in on the
> > discussion now :).
>
> Who else is in this?  Have you talked to the Venezualan folks?  SRA?
>
> As you know, I'm strongly in favor of a good, generally respected
> certification.  Let's get all of the interested folks on one project.

Up to now SRA OSS, Inc. Japan's certification has more than 1,000
examinees. I'm proud of this, but am not satisfied with this. From the
beginning of the certification, I have a dream that someday the
certification be managed by public entity, not by a private company
like us. Yes, that's my goal. So if Josh and his folks are very
serious about making a good certfication, I'm more than happy to help
them.

However running a certification programs (not just making examins) is
not a trivial work. Moreover it costs a lot of money (over $40,000 per
year in our case). Josh, how do you overcome those problems?
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan

Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>> Josh,
>
> However running a certification programs (not just making examins) is
> not a trivial work. Moreover it costs a lot of money (over $40,000 per
> year in our case). Josh, how do you overcome those problems?

As the resources become required I am sure that I can make sure they are
provided.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

Well until now... i think i am the only venezuelan here.... i havent
been able to  locate Cesar Villanueva.... >.< anyone knows other
venezuelans arround?

Btw... i've joined the cert list aswell

2008/1/31, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:17:43 -0800
> Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
>
> Current broadcast members are:
>
> Myself
> Magnus
> Robert
> Chander (need to get him on the website)
>
> Bruce has a pending invitation (which I didn't send yet)
>
> I have not spoken with SRA or the Venezualan folks but am more than
> happy to have them involved.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Joshua D. Drake
> - --
> The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/
> PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
> Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
> PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director |  PostgreSQL political pundit
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFHoPiMATb/zqfZUUQRAqMHAJsHop8kUqHkHRLJMjNFBIny+dIiYQCfXz19
> fXELUEQ3khSifVR6JJaI3K8=
> =N1BL
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>

Santiago Zarate wrote:
> Well until now... i think i am the only venezuelan here.... i havent
> been able to  locate Cesar Villanueva.... >.< anyone knows other
> venezuelans arround?

I think they are talking about Ricardo Strusberg.  He was interested in
setting up a Pg training/certification program.

Regarding Cesar Villanueva, I bet you can reach him at
ve@postgresql.org.

--
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

Hi all,

First of all, thanks to Josuah to start this usefull and long time
waited project :-)

Oleg Bartunov wrote :
> Can you show us the goals of the PostgreSQL Certification ?

To me, there are two things Id like to be "PostgreSQL Certified":

 - individuals
 - companies

Id really prefer my company be certified by the community rather than by
a company, despite the full respect I have in SRA's engagement in
PostgreSQL and that we all know their contributions.

> I always voted for the united PostgreSQL Certification program (amin,
> developer) we could promote with the help of commercial companies.

Count on us (Dalibo) and us (PostgreSQLFr non-profit).

> In my opinion, common certificate, valid in all countries will be much more
> useful than buttons.

Definitely. We discussed the topic at Prato. We were talking there about
it could be a project inside PostgreSQL-Europe.

I'd be more than happy if this could be a Worldwide project instead.

> We have several good authors who can be sponsored
> to write certification courses with the help of developers.

Yes, I think so. Dalibo could contribute too, on its own. I know some of
the non-profit that can contribute too.

> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> Myself and a small team of PostgreSQL contributors have started a new
> community project for PostgreSQL Certification. It is just launching
> but we wanted to get it out there so that people can join in on the
> discussion now :).
>
> For more information please visit:
> http://www.postgresqlcertification.org/
> Joshua D. Drake

Thanks for such a good initiative, Josuah:

«Your subscription request has been received..»: let's talk about this
in the mailing-list :)

Cheers,

--
Jean-Paul Argudo
www.PostgreSQLFr.org
www.Dalibo.com

Argentina presente ;-)

Regards,
gb.-

On Feb 3, 2008 6:49 AM, Jean-Paul Argudo <jean-paul@argudo.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> First of all, thanks to Josuah to start this usefull and long time
> waited project :-)
>
> Oleg Bartunov wrote :
> > Can you show us the goals of the PostgreSQL Certification ?
>
> To me, there are two things Id like to be "PostgreSQL Certified":
>
>  - individuals
>  - companies
>
> Id really prefer my company be certified by the community rather than by
> a company, despite the full respect I have in SRA's engagement in
> PostgreSQL and that we all know their contributions.
>
> > I always voted for the united PostgreSQL Certification program (amin,
> > developer) we could promote with the help of commercial companies.
>
> Count on us (Dalibo) and us (PostgreSQLFr non-profit).
>
> > In my opinion, common certificate, valid in all countries will be much more
> > useful than buttons.
>
> Definitely. We discussed the topic at Prato. We were talking there about
> it could be a project inside PostgreSQL-Europe.
>
> I'd be more than happy if this could be a Worldwide project instead.
>
> > We have several good authors who can be sponsored
> > to write certification courses with the help of developers.
>
> Yes, I think so. Dalibo could contribute too, on its own. I know some of
> the non-profit that can contribute too.
>
> > On Wed, 30 Jan 2008, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > Hey guys,
> >
> > Myself and a small team of PostgreSQL contributors have started a new
> > community project for PostgreSQL Certification. It is just launching
> > but we wanted to get it out there so that people can join in on the
> > discussion now :).
> >
> > For more information please visit:
> > http://www.postgresqlcertification.org/
> > Joshua D. Drake
>
> Thanks for such a good initiative, Josuah:
>
> «Your subscription request has been received..»: let's talk about this
> in the mailing-list :)
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Jean-Paul Argudo
> www.PostgreSQLFr.org
> www.Dalibo.com
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>        subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
>        message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>



--
Guido Barosio
-----------------------
http://www.globant.com
guido.barosio@globant.com

JPA,

> Id really prefer my company be certified by the community rather than by
> a company, despite the full respect I have in SRA's engagement in
> PostgreSQL and that we all know their contributions.

What would it mean for a company to be certified?

--Josh

Josh Berkus wrote:
>> Id really prefer my company be certified by the community rather than by
>> a company, despite the full respect I have in SRA's engagement in
>> PostgreSQL and that we all know their contributions.
> What would it mean for a company to be certified?
I'd hope it'd mean that I can have some degree of confidence
hiring that organization for Postgresql support.  No?

It seems to have very similar benefits as certifying individuals.

Microsoft seems to have something like that for their
partners in their "Database Management competency"
https://partner.microsoft.com/global/40012911

On Sun, 03 Feb 2008 11:28:24 -0800
Ron Mayer <rm_pg@cheapcomplexdevices.com> wrote:

> Josh Berkus wrote:
> >> Id really prefer my company be certified by the community rather
> >> than by a company, despite the full respect I have in SRA's
> >> engagement in PostgreSQL and that we all know their contributions.
> > What would it mean for a company to be certified?
> I'd hope it'd mean that I can have some degree of confidence
> hiring that organization for Postgresql support.  No?
>
> It seems to have very similar benefits as certifying individuals.
>
> Microsoft seems to have something like that for their
> partners in their "Database Management competency"
> https://partner.microsoft.com/global/40012911
>

Guys, with respect this thread does nothing for us unless it is on the
certification list.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

>
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0,
> the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
> joining column's datatypes do not match
>

"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:

> Guys, with respect this thread does nothing for us unless it is on the
> certification list.

Do we really need a separate mailing list for every thread? It's already kind
of crazy with dozens of lists, many of them moribund, which most people aren't
even aware exist.

I was going to suggest pruning the mailing lists down to just 3-4 already. The
last thing we need to be doing is creating new ones.

--
  Gregory Stark
  EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com
  Ask me about EnterpriseDB's PostGIS support!

On Feb 4, 2008 12:18 PM, Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
>
> > Guys, with respect this thread does nothing for us unless it is on the
> > certification list.
>
> Do we really need a separate mailing list for every thread? It's already kind
> of crazy with dozens of lists, many of them moribund, which most people aren't
> even aware exist.

Even a new domain seems odd to me - if this is to be official, then
surely it should be under postgresql.org. Otherwise, whats to stop me
or anyone else starting a competing certification and claiming it's
just as valid? (other than the fact I don't have the time or energy!).

/D

On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 12:18 +0000, Gregory Stark wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
>
> > Guys, with respect this thread does nothing for us unless it is on the
> > certification list.
>
> Do we really need a separate mailing list for every thread? It's already kind
> of crazy with dozens of lists, many of them moribund, which most people aren't
> even aware exist.
>
> I was going to suggest pruning the mailing lists down to just 3-4 already. The
> last thing we need to be doing is creating new ones.

+1

At least for me it's far easier to ignore threads I'm not interested in
than subscribe to yet another list. This particular subject
(certification) would be interesting for me as a potential end user, so
I'm not really qualified for any comment on the organization side of it,
but ultimately interested in the end result. I suspect many of the
postgres general list subscribers are in the same situation, so why not
let them know about how it evolves ?

Cheers,
Csaba.

Dave Page wrote:

> Even a new domain seems odd to me - if this is to be official, then
> surely it should be under postgresql.org.

+1

--
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

On Feb 4, 2008 4:27 AM, Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org> wrote:

> Even a new domain seems odd to me - if this is to be official, then
> surely it should be under postgresql.org.

Having a separate TLD actually increases the visibility of the effort
from a search engine perspective.

We can learn a lesson from Perl advocacy - it is still possible to
render projects invisible to the outside world through excessive
consolidation.  A search for "perl blogs" still does not put
use.perl.org in the top results.

-selena

--
Selena Deckelmann
PDXPUG - Portland PostgreSQL Users Group
http://pugs.postgresql.org/pdx
http://www.chesnok.com/daily

"Selena Deckelmann" <selenamarie@gmail.com> writes:

> On Feb 4, 2008 4:27 AM, Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org> wrote:
>
>> Even a new domain seems odd to me - if this is to be official, then
>> surely it should be under postgresql.org.
>
> Having a separate TLD actually increases the visibility of the effort
> from a search engine perspective.
>
> We can learn a lesson from Perl advocacy - it is still possible to
> render projects invisible to the outside world through excessive
> consolidation.  A search for "perl blogs" still does not put
> use.perl.org in the top results.

Firstly, if we could be a tenth as successful as Perl that would be great.

Secondly, the above has nothing to do with whether it's in a new domain or not
and everything to do with how often those blogs are linked to from the outside
world. I've never heard of them which tells you something about how heavily
referenced they are.

In any case search engine optimization is a mugs game. Concentrate on building
a service that people want to use and people will talk about it and that will
get you on the search engines. Search engines follow, they don't lead.

--
  Gregory Stark
  EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com
  Ask me about EnterpriseDB's On-Demand Production Tuning

On Monday 04 February 2008 09:52, Selena Deckelmann wrote:
> On Feb 4, 2008 4:27 AM, Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org> wrote:
> > Even a new domain seems odd to me - if this is to be official, then
> > surely it should be under postgresql.org.
>
> Having a separate TLD actually increases the visibility of the effort
> from a search engine perspective.
>
> We can learn a lesson from Perl advocacy - it is still possible to
> render projects invisible to the outside world through excessive
> consolidation.  A search for "perl blogs" still does not put
> use.perl.org in the top results.
>

hmm, i'd have thought you would have wanted planet.perl.org anyway (though
that doesn't show up either)

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

On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 12:18:55 +0000
Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> wrote:

> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
>
> > Guys, with respect this thread does nothing for us unless it is on
> > the certification list.
>
> Do we really need a separate mailing list for every thread? It's
> already kind of crazy with dozens of lists, many of them moribund,
> which most people aren't even aware exist.
>
> I was going to suggest pruning the mailing lists down to just 3-4
> already. The last thing we need to be doing is creating new ones.
>

I don't agree in the least, I was actually going to suggest we add a
new one for relational design questions. I like many lists that are
contextually specific. IMO, general should be removed for example.

Joshua D. Draek

--
The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director |  PostgreSQL political pundit

On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 08:31 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 12:18:55 +0000
> Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> > "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:

> > I was going to suggest pruning the mailing lists down to just 3-4
> > already. The last thing we need to be doing is creating new ones.
> >
>
> I don't agree in the least, I was actually going to suggest we add a
> new one for relational design questions. I like many lists that are
> contextually specific. IMO, general should be removed for example.

Why don't you go ahead and create those special lists and make general
collect all of them ? Some sort of hierarchy of lists... if doable at
all, that could make everybody happy...

Cheers,
Csaba.

On Feb 4, 2008 7:07 AM, Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> "Selena Deckelmann" <selenamarie@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On Feb 4, 2008 4:27 AM, Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Even a new domain seems odd to me - if this is to be official, then
> >> surely it should be under postgresql.org.
> >
> > Having a separate TLD actually increases the visibility of the effort
> > from a search engine perspective.
> >
> > We can learn a lesson from Perl advocacy - it is still possible to
> > render projects invisible to the outside world through excessive
> > consolidation.  A search for "perl blogs" still does not put
> > use.perl.org in the top results.
>
> Firstly, if we could be a tenth as successful as Perl that would be great.

I agree!  :)

> Secondly, the above has nothing to do with whether it's in a new domain or not
> and everything to do with how often those blogs are linked to from the outside
> world. I've never heard of them which tells you something about how heavily
> referenced they are.

Ok, I think that I stated things to broadly. The search problem
doesn't affect people who are already in the know - it affects
everyone else.  I'm sure you're aware that a large number of
references doesn't necessarily mean that the information has any
quality.

Too much consolidation inhibits growth and probably discourages it.  I
was only trying to say that there's nothing wrong with having multiple
domains.  If we suddenly had 100 postgresql-related domains pop up
with interesting content, things would be messy for a bit but the
situation would work itself out.

And postgresql.org would still be there to guide the way through the mess.

> In any case search engine optimization is a mugs game. Concentrate on building
> a service that people want to use and people will talk about it and that will
> get you on the search engines. Search engines follow, they don't lead.

I agree except for that last bit.  Search is huge and relying only on
word-of-mouth is silly when we have plenty of people who know how to
optimize.

-selena

--
Selena Deckelmann
PDXPUG - Portland PostgreSQL Users Group
http://pugs.postgresql.org/pdx
http://www.chesnok.com/daily

> I agree except for that last bit.  Search is huge and relying only on
> word-of-mouth is silly when we have plenty of people who know how to
> optimize.

This is completely the wrong argument to be having.  Search engine issues
are important only *after* you have a certification exam and program.
Right now, you have a mailing list and presumably a trac archive, i.e.
nothing.  Search issues are at least a year away.

So the important thing at this stage is getting the maximum number of
useful community members to contribute to creating the certification.  Is
that better done on -advocacy or on a separate list?  Is there any reason
for a separate domain?

If I were organizing it, I'd create a separate list but on postgresql.org,
e.g. pgsql-certification@postgresql.org, to develop the certification, and
maybe a 3ld for the trac, like certification.postgresql.org.  That gives
the effort an instant "community" stamp.  It also limits the domain
proliferation problem which was one of the chief complaints about our
project 3 years ago before we rolled up the 6 domains what made up the
main postgresql.org.

It would also mean that the list archives are searchable together with all
the other postgresql.org list archives, an important point.

So, I'm in favor of a separate list, but think that having a separate
domain is a mistake.  The separate domain says "this is a Drake and Selena
effort and not a community effort" to those not involved.

--
--Josh

Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco

On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 09:11:52 -0800
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:

> So, I'm in favor of a separate list, but think that having a separate
> domain is a mistake.  The separate domain says "this is a Drake and
> Selena effort and not a community effort" to those not involved.

Selena isn't involved in the organization of this project, of course you
knew that as I already posted who the original members were.

There are several reasons that I didn't request a certification list
@postgresql.org, not at least of which is that I didn't want to waste
precious cycles on this very discussion.

I am more interested in garnering small but influential support via
known contributors on a pro-certification, pro-productivity list. These
are the people that are interested in actually helping getting the work
done. You have already admitted you are not one of those.

Please let us be productive now.

Joshua D. Drake

--
The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director |  PostgreSQL political pundit

Josh Berkus escribió:

> So, I'm in favor of a separate list, but think that having a separate
> domain is a mistake.  The separate domain says "this is a Drake and Selena
> effort and not a community effort" to those not involved.

Which is also what postgresqlconference.org and planetpostgresql.org
(etc) mean.

--
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

On Feb 4, 2008 9:36 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> Josh Berkus escribió:
>
> > So, I'm in favor of a separate list, but think that having a separate
> > domain is a mistake.  The separate domain says "this is a Drake and Selena
> > effort and not a community effort" to those not involved.
>
> Which is also what postgresqlconference.org and planetpostgresql.org
> (etc) mean.

I'm only involved with one of those :)

PUGS is under postgresql.org.

-selena

--
Selena Deckelmann
PDXPUG - Portland PostgreSQL Users Group
http://pugs.postgresql.org/pdx
http://www.chesnok.com/daily

--- "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 12:18:55 +0000
> Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
> > "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> >
> > I was going to suggest pruning the mailing lists down to just 3-4
> > already. The last thing we need to be doing is creating new ones.
> >
>
> I don't agree in the least, I was actually going to suggest we add
> a
> new one for relational design questions. I like many lists that are
> contextually specific. IMO, general should be removed for example.
>

I'd like to have many lists also.  There are so many messages in
general that I have a hard time keeping up.  I would like to be able
to just pick and choose those topics that interest me.  Having one
for design, one for PL programming, one for SQL, etc would be great.
Sign up for those that interest you and ignore the rest.

Just my .02.

Thanks,

LewisC



Lewis R Cunningham

An Expert's Guide to Oracle Technology
http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/oracle/guide/

LewisC's Random Thoughts
http://lewiscsrandomthoughts.blogspot.com/

On Feb 4, 2008, at 11:55 AM, Lewis Cunningham wrote:

>
> --- "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 12:18:55 +0000
>> Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
>>>
>>> I was going to suggest pruning the mailing lists down to just 3-4
>>> already. The last thing we need to be doing is creating new ones.
>>>
>>
>> I don't agree in the least, I was actually going to suggest we add
>> a
>> new one for relational design questions. I like many lists that are
>> contextually specific. IMO, general should be removed for example.
>>
>
> I'd like to have many lists also.  There are so many messages in
> general that I have a hard time keeping up.  I would like to be able
> to just pick and choose those topics that interest me.  Having one
> for design, one for PL programming, one for SQL, etc would be great.
> Sign up for those that interest you and ignore the rest.

The sole argument I'd have against that, and I think it's a good one,
is that just seeing the plethora of different topics moving through
pgsql-general has been a key factor to exposing me to new topics as
well as having already seen the solutions to issues well before I've
encountered them.

Erik Jones

DBA | Emma®
erik@myemma.com
800.595.4401 or 615.292.5888
615.292.0777 (fax)

Emma helps organizations everywhere communicate & market in style.
Visit us online at http://www.myemma.com

On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 06:52:42AM -0800, Selena Deckelmann wrote:
> Having a separate TLD actually increases the visibility of the effort
> from a search engine perspective.

Having just come from the domain name industry, I can report that that's
only sort of true.  Did you "taste" this domain for traffic to prove it was
true in this case?

A

On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 12:31:05 -0600
Erik Jones <erik@myemma.com> wrote:

> The sole argument I'd have against that, and I think it's a good
> one, is that just seeing the plethora of different topics moving
> through pgsql-general has been a key factor to exposing me to new
> topics as well as having already seen the solutions to issues well
> before I've encountered them.
>

Right, I believe that is a valid argument. I think the real
problem is that as a community we are not diligent in pushing people to
the contextually specific lists we already have.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake


--
The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director |  PostgreSQL political pundit

--- Erik Jones <erik@myemma.com> wrote:

> On Feb 4, 2008, at 11:55 AM, Lewis Cunningham wrote:
>
> >
> > I'd like to have many lists also.  There are so many messages in
> > general that I have a hard time keeping up.  I would like to be
> able
> > to just pick and choose those topics that interest me.  Having
> one
> > for design, one for PL programming, one for SQL, etc would be
> great.
> > Sign up for those that interest you and ignore the rest.
>
> The sole argument I'd have against that, and I think it's a good
> one,
> is that just seeing the plethora of different topics moving through
>
> pgsql-general has been a key factor to exposing me to new topics as
>
> well as having already seen the solutions to issues well before
> I've
> encountered them.
>
> Erik Jones
>

That is a good point.  I've learned things reading general that I
didn't even know I didn't know.  ;-)

At the same time, I'm sure I miss things I need to know due to the
noise on the list.  By noise I mean other topics not spam or
anything.

LewisC



Lewis R Cunningham

An Expert's Guide to Oracle Technology
http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/oracle/guide/

LewisC's Random Thoughts
http://lewiscsrandomthoughts.blogspot.com/

"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:

> On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 12:31:05 -0600
> Erik Jones <erik@myemma.com> wrote:
>
>> The sole argument I'd have against that, and I think it's a good
>> one, is that just seeing the plethora of different topics moving
>> through pgsql-general has been a key factor to exposing me to new
>> topics as well as having already seen the solutions to issues well
>> before I've encountered them.
>
> Right, I believe that is a valid argument. I think the real
> problem is that as a community we are not diligent in pushing people to
> the contextually specific lists we already have.

Well a) it usually would take more bandwidth to do that than it would save.
and b) I'm not sure what the point is since it's basically the same set of
people on all the lists. Also c) it sounds like you're agreeing with him and
then you're suggesting the polar opposite. The same argument holds for
-hackers at a higher level. Man issues, even those which are not technical
hacker issues, can be important for everyone to be aware of.

I think the only purpose having many lists is serving is to allow people to
act as "gatekeepers". In this case, "I only want to discuss it with a small
number of people who are more likely to agree with me".

I think we would be better served by the USENET model[*] of forking only when
experience shows it's necessary, rather than in anticipation of traffic which
may never materialize and may in fact not be of interest to all. I mean
seriously, do we really have 20 different groups of people involved here? (and
that's *not* counting the regional groups or the "inactive" lists.)

I would junk pgsql-sql, pgsql-ports, pgsql-performance, pgsql-novice and
redirect them all to pgsql-general and pgsql-docs, pgsql-interfaces, and
pgsql-bugs and send them all to -hackers.

I would also suggest junking pgsql-advocacy and pgsql-www as well. They're
mostly noise but they're noise we should be at least peripherally aware of and
not allow to slip under the radar because it happens in a corner where not
everyone is subscribed. That's what happened recently on another topic and it
seems to be what's happening now with this certification stuff.

By all means, involve only the people you want but you should have to conduct
yourselves out in the open where others have a chance to speak up and shout
stop if you're doing something on their behalf that they don't like.

[*] "New newsgroups are formed not on The Field Of Dreams theory- "if you
    build it, they will come"- but on the Brooklyn Dodgers theory- "dammit,
    there's too many teams in this city: someone move out!"--Charles Seaton

--
  Gregory Stark
  EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com
  Ask me about EnterpriseDB's On-Demand Production Tuning

Erik Jones <erik@myemma.com> writes:
> On Feb 4, 2008, at 11:55 AM, Lewis Cunningham wrote:
>> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
>>> I don't agree in the least, I was actually going to suggest we add a
>>> new one for relational design questions. I like many lists that are
>>> contextually specific. IMO, general should be removed for example.
>>
>> I'd like to have many lists also.  There are so many messages in
>> general that I have a hard time keeping up.  I would like to be able
>> to just pick and choose those topics that interest me.  Having one
>> for design, one for PL programming, one for SQL, etc would be great.
>> Sign up for those that interest you and ignore the rest.

> The sole argument I'd have against that, and I think it's a good one,
> is that just seeing the plethora of different topics moving through
> pgsql-general has been a key factor to exposing me to new topics as
> well as having already seen the solutions to issues well before I've
> encountered them.

Whether you like narrow lists or not, removing -general would certainly
be complete folly.  There's always a need for an "other" list.  If you
try to get away without it, you'll just end up with off-topic questions
being asked on some random one of the narrow-topic lists.

            regards, tom lane

On Mon, February 4, 2008 2:48 pm, Gregory Stark wrote:

> [*] "New newsgroups are formed not on The Field Of Dreams theory- "if you
>     build it, they will come"- but on the Brooklyn Dodgers theory-
> "dammit,
>     there's too many teams in this city: someone move out!"--Charles
> Seaton

It appears that we agree on the theory.  We differ on the measurement.

From experience, it is best to do the certification on a distinct list.

The PostgreSQL project is not immune to the "too many cooks" problem.  It
has an abundance of people willing to contribute.  But unfortunately, most
of them are only willing to contribute their opinions when what is lacking
is heavy lifting.

--
Dan Langille - http://www.langille.org/

On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 19:48:16 +0000
Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> wrote:

> > Right, I believe that is a valid argument. I think the real
> > problem is that as a community we are not diligent in pushing
> > people to the contextually specific lists we already have.

> I would junk pgsql-sql, pgsql-ports, pgsql-performance, pgsql-novice
> and redirect them all to pgsql-general and pgsql-docs,
> pgsql-interfaces, and pgsql-bugs and send them all to -hackers.

I could see ports going to hackers but bugs should be a bug tracker
that copies hackers or bugs.

I could see eliminating -sql, -novice and -interfaces.

-performance is a little bit tougher because it may be a -hacker issue
or an -admin issue.

Docs should absolutely be separate in order to keep the noise level
down.


> I would also suggest junking pgsql-advocacy and pgsql-www as well.
> They're mostly noise but they're noise we should be at least

Sorry but that isn't going to happen and pgsql-www is nowhere near just
noise. It is vital to the operation of the infrastructure.

> peripherally aware of and not allow to slip under the radar because
> it happens in a corner where not everyone is subscribed. That's what
> happened recently on another topic and it seems to be what's
> happening now with this certification stuff.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake


--
The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director |  PostgreSQL political pundit

Everyone,

> > I would junk pgsql-sql, pgsql-ports, pgsql-performance, pgsql-novice
> > and redirect them all to pgsql-general and pgsql-docs,
> > pgsql-interfaces, and pgsql-bugs and send them all to -hackers.

Speaking of keeping discussions on topic: this discussion is taking off in
a tangent at this point, and it's on two lists.  So can we either get it
back to constructive work, or kill it off, please?

While *some* people on these lists have the mail software to filter
100messages/day, there are other subscribers who are driven away by
excessive volume.  So please do your part to keep the lists accessable to
everyone.  Thanks!

--
--Josh

Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco

"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:

> On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 19:48:16 +0000
>
> -performance is a little bit tougher because it may be a -hacker issue
> or an -admin issue.

In my experience it is really a carbon copy of -general. I wasn't even aware
of -admin before. Is it just "administrating postgres"? How is that different
from pgsql-general?

> Docs should absolutely be separate in order to keep the noise level
> down.

See this is the problem. Who is going to work on docs if not people
documenting the stuff they're writing? So everyone on -hackers ends up
subscribed to -docs as well anyways. And -bugs. You're creating them "to keep
the noise level down" but they don't keep the noise level down at all.

>> I would also suggest junking pgsql-advocacy and pgsql-www as well.
>> They're mostly noise but they're noise we should be at least
>
> Sorry but that isn't going to happen and pgsql-www is nowhere near just
> noise. It is vital to the operation of the infrastructure.

Sure it's vital that there be on-list discussions. But they should be in the
open, not in a quiet corner where others might miss them.

To put it simply I think we really only need two public lists:

pgsql-hackers
pgsql-users

There really aren't any other groups of people. "people who want to talk about
x" isn't a separate group and they shouldn't go off and talk about x without
the others. People who don't want to talk about x are still interested in
knowing that someone is talking about it and should still see that the
discussion is happening even if they don't follow it in detail.

--
  Gregory Stark
  EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com
  Ask me about EnterpriseDB's 24x7 Postgres support!

--- Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> wrote:

>
> pgsql-hackers
> pgsql-users
>
> There really aren't any other groups of people. "people who want to
> talk about

There are hackers (contribute to PostgreSQL), DBAs (administer the
database), Developers (write application to interact with the
database) and users (use a tool like pgAdmin to query the database)?

When talking about coders, there are pl/pgSQL, PL/xxx, SQL, external
langauges.  I think there are many groups.

If a person is interested in all the groups, is it hard to subscribe?
 No.

If all groups are in one, is it hard to filter out?  Yes.

LewisC



Lewis R Cunningham

An Expert's Guide to Oracle Technology
http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/oracle/guide/

LewisC's Random Thoughts
http://lewiscsrandomthoughts.blogspot.com/

Lewis Cunningham wrote:
> --- Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
>
>> pgsql-hackers
>> pgsql-users
>>
>> There really aren't any other groups of people. "people who want to
>> talk about
>>
>
> There are hackers (contribute to PostgreSQL), DBAs (administer the
> database), Developers (write application to interact with the
> database) and users (use a tool like pgAdmin to query the database)?
>
> When talking about coders, there are pl/pgSQL, PL/xxx, SQL, external
> langauges.  I think there are many groups.
>
> If a person is interested in all the groups, is it hard to subscribe?
>  No.
>
> If all groups are in one, is it hard to filter out?  Yes.
>
> LewisC
>
>
>
> Lewis R Cunningham
>
> An Expert's Guide to Oracle Technology
> http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/oracle/guide/
>
> LewisC's Random Thoughts
> http://lewiscsrandomthoughts.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
>                http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
>

Em Monday 04 February 2008 14:38:31 Csaba Nagy escreveu:

> Why don't you go ahead and create those special lists and make general
> collect all of them ? Some sort of hierarchy of lists... if doable at
> all, that could make everybody happy...

That's an excellent idea.


--
Jorge Godoy      <jgodoy@gmail.com>

Lewis Cunningham <lewisc@rocketmail.com> writes:
> If a person is interested in all the groups, is it hard to subscribe?
>  No.
> If all groups are in one, is it hard to filter out?  Yes.

Some people like to filter PG mail into different folders for different
lists, so that they can read with more focus.  That would get
significantly harder if we merged the lists into just a couple.  On the
other hand, if you see the lists as one big discussion, you can have
them all arrive in one folder (and set your subscription to filter dups
from cross-posted messages).  I happen to fall in the latter camp but
I don't want to make life hard for the former camp, especially not
when it wouldn't really buy anything for me.

I agree with the original complaint about not creating new lists without
significant evidence that one is needed, but that doesn't translate into
wanting to smash everything down to a couple of lists.

            regards, tom lane

On Feb 4, 2008, at 11:31 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

> I don't agree in the least, I was actually going to suggest we add a
> new one for relational design questions. I like many lists that are
> contextually specific. IMO, general should be removed for example.
>

I think this makes sense for a web-based forum, not for mailing lists
to which you need to subscribe (and in my case set up auto-filers to
move the stuff out of my inbox).

> Joshua D. Draek

Is this your alternete evil twin? ;-)