Thread: Databasing sponsors
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello, I am in the process of databasing the /sponsors page. These are my initial thoughts: sponsor table: id - serial pk stype - the type of sponsor description - how they sponsor sponsor_type: stype: the type of sponsor (pk) developer_to_sponsor: developer_id, key to developers.id sponsor_id, key to sponsors.id Anybody see any problem with this? Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake - -- The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ United States PostgreSQL Association: http://www.postgresql.us/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFH9Q/ZATb/zqfZUUQRAqVwAJ4u2PUuBcYyfLh11yyfTrf0znD6KwCfUOWn DJKUFVKItqUyKU5Bb6SHs5Q= =hd7/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Thu, 3 Apr 2008, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hello, > > I am in the process of databasing the /sponsors page. These are my > initial thoughts: > > sponsor table: > > id - serial pk > stype - the type of sponsor > description - how they sponsor > > sponsor_type: > > stype: the type of sponsor (pk) > > developer_to_sponsor: > > developer_id, key to developers.id > sponsor_id, key to sponsors.id > > Anybody see any problem with this? you forget about 'what they sponsored'. > > Sincerely, > > Joshua D. Drake > > > > > - -- > The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ > PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ > United States PostgreSQL Association: http://www.postgresql.us/ > Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) > > iD8DBQFH9Q/ZATb/zqfZUUQRAqVwAJ4u2PUuBcYyfLh11yyfTrf0znD6KwCfUOWn > DJKUFVKItqUyKU5Bb6SHs5Q= > =hd7/ > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > 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
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 3 Apr 2008 23:22:53 +0400 (MSD) Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su> wrote: > > developer_id, key to developers.id > > sponsor_id, key to sponsors.id > > > > Anybody see any problem with this? > > you forget about 'what they sponsored'. That is sponsor.description. I almost called it sponsor.what but felt that was a little weird. Joshua D. Drake - -- The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ United States PostgreSQL Association: http://www.postgresql.us/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFH9TJLATb/zqfZUUQRAhRcAKCHasI8/xoGus618ctTleOSM6MI8QCgqb+W QrEZ3QmdEvLJCgn2AaEbMro= =q85/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Josh, > sponsor table: > > id - serial pk > stype - the type of sponsor > description - how they sponsor name - sponsor name link - sponsor link image - sponsor logo image location location - sponsor location (of HQ, if appropriate) source - source of sponsor information > sponsor_type: > > stype: the type of sponsor (pk) I'd like to expand this system to cover doing the full sponsor breakdown we discussed and approved 1.5 years ago but never implemented. So as long as I can stuff giving categories into "stype", I'm good with it. -- --Josh Josh Berkus PostgreSQL @ Sun San Francisco
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 3 Apr 2008 16:15:45 -0700 Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: > Josh, > > > sponsor table: > > > > id - serial pk > > stype - the type of sponsor > > description - how they sponsor > name - sponsor name Doh... I had that on my screen, don't know why I didn't paste. > link - sponsor link Sure. > image - sponsor logo image location Sure. > location - sponsor location (of HQ, if appropriate) If we are doing that, I want full info (address, contact etc.. not exposed of course). > source - source of sponsor information What type of source are we talking about here? > > > > sponsor_type: > > > > stype: the type of sponsor (pk) > We need to add a sort column here, so we know which one shows first. > I'd like to expand this system to cover doing the full sponsor > breakdown we discussed and approved 1.5 years ago but never > implemented. So as long as I can stuff giving categories into Let's not get ahead of ourselves. It was discussed, it was never approved and as you are fully aware I had reservations about it. Further later in conversations we discussed a different scenario. However, this is a technical discussion and we can get into those details later. > "stype", I'm good with it. > Which we will be able to do. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake - -- The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ United States PostgreSQL Association: http://www.postgresql.us/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFH9YK+ATb/zqfZUUQRAib8AKCraSkCKtnqWbs0dIGTveQwrxnP0QCfWp8i X6ItZbCP2cY0nA/DOhBnS6U= =VZp2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Thursday 03 April 2008 21:22, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Apr 2008 16:15:45 -0700
>
> Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
> > Josh,
> >
> > > sponsor table:
> > >
> > > id - serial pk
> > > stype - the type of sponsor
> > > description - how they sponsor
> >
> > name - sponsor name
>
> Doh... I had that on my screen, don't know why I didn't paste.
>
> > link - sponsor link
>
> Sure.
>
> > image - sponsor logo image location
>
> Sure.
>
> > location - sponsor location (of HQ, if appropriate)
>
> If we are doing that, I want full info (address, contact etc.. not
> exposed of course).
>
> > source - source of sponsor information
>
> What type of source are we talking about here?
>
> > > sponsor_type:
> > >
> > > stype: the type of sponsor (pk)
>
> We need to add a sort column here, so we know which one shows first.
>
> > I'd like to expand this system to cover doing the full sponsor
> > breakdown we discussed and approved 1.5 years ago but never
> > implemented. So as long as I can stuff giving categories into
>
> Let's not get ahead of ourselves. It was discussed, it was never
> approved and as you are fully aware I had reservations about it.
> Further later in conversations we discussed a different scenario.
> However, this is a technical discussion and we can get into those
> details later.
>
It's not clear to me that you haven't already opened this up by adding the
stype field. I don't see anything on the current sponsors page that
indicates what type of sponsor people are, so you've made a subtle but
substantive change to the system defining the schema as you did.
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 01:12:42 -0400 Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > > > I'd like to expand this system to cover doing the full sponsor > > > breakdown we discussed and approved 1.5 years ago but never > > > implemented. So as long as I can stuff giving categories into > > > > Let's not get ahead of ourselves. It was discussed, it was never > > approved and as you are fully aware I had reservations about it. > > Further later in conversations we discussed a different scenario. > > However, this is a technical discussion and we can get into those > > details later. > > > > It's not clear to me that you haven't already opened this up by > adding the stype field. I don't see anything on the current sponsors > page that indicates what type of sponsor people are, so you've made a > subtle but substantive change to the system defining the schema as > you did. > Categorization is going to happen. The question is how, which is not a question for this thread. Joshua D. Drake -- The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ United States PostgreSQL Association: http://www.postgresql.us/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
On Fri, 4 Apr 2008 04:10:22 -0700 "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote: > > Categorization is going to happen. The question is how, which is not a > question for this thread. Or more to the point, I really don't want to clutter of a technical discussion with something that belongs on advocacy (or somewhere else). For the categorization we need a name and a sort order at a minimum. So that is what I want to put in place for now. When we hammer out "what" the categorization is going to be, we can implement the actual changes. Joshua D. Drake -- The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ United States PostgreSQL Association: http://www.postgresql.us/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Josh, > Let's not get ahead of ourselves. It was discussed, it was never > approved and as you are fully aware I had reservations about it. > Further later in conversations we discussed a different scenario. > However, this is a technical discussion and we can get into those > details later. It was discussed on this list until there were no objections, and then discussed and approved in an SPI/JPUG/Fr meeting at the Anniversary. We might want to change some specifics now that there are more groups involved, but I also think you should hesitate before restarting the whole discussion process, since getting up what we decided on 1.5 years ago has taken long enough. In other words, if you start rearguing it, then it's likely sponsor listing will never go up. And I don't think that satisfies *anyone*. It's the web site design all over again. -- --Josh Josh Berkus PostgreSQL @ Sun San Francisco
On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 7:27 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: > It was discussed on this list until there were no objections, and then > discussed and approved in an SPI/JPUG/Fr meeting at the Anniversary. What does it have to do with SPI, JPUG or Fr (as groups, not the individuals in them)? -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Friday 04 April 2008 07:14, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Apr 2008 04:10:22 -0700
>
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> > Categorization is going to happen. The question is how, which is not a
> > question for this thread.
>
> Or more to the point, I really don't want to clutter of a technical
> discussion with something that belongs on advocacy (or somewhere else).
> For the categorization we need a name and a sort order at a minimum. So
> that is what I want to put in place for now.
>
> When we hammer out "what" the categorization is going to be, we can
> implement the actual changes.
>
But to implement the current setup, we don't need any of that (we can sort by
name only), so we should probably leave out the categorization untill we
actually know what that should look like.
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
Dave, > What does it have to do with SPI, JPUG or Fr (as groups, not the > individuals in them)? Because at the time those were our only fundraising vehicles. It was also an open session and several people not in any of those orgs attended. Now, of course, we'd need to pull in PGUS, PGEU, and PostgreSQL.Br. However, I stand by the idea that the donor schema from then is still basically OK and we can put it up and then incrementally improve it. If we try for the 100% perfect donor listings, then it'll just be the website redesign all over again. -- --Josh Josh Berkus PostgreSQL @ Sun San Francisco
On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 1:02 AM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: > Dave, > > > > What does it have to do with SPI, JPUG or Fr (as groups, not the > > individuals in them)? > > Because at the time those were our only fundraising vehicles. It was also > an open session and several people not in any of those orgs attended. Don't suppose you recall what it clashed with do you? I don't remember it at all. > Now, of course, we'd need to pull in PGUS, PGEU, and PostgreSQL.Br. No, I don't think we do - we're only interested in sponsors of postgresql.org (and possibly family, per our offlist conversation) on www.postgresql.org. The regional groups have their own websites and use funding for their own purposes, so I believe its up to them to recognise their own sponsors. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> > Now, of course, we'd need to pull in PGUS, PGEU, and PostgreSQL.Br. > > No, I don't think we do - we're only interested in sponsors of > postgresql.org (and possibly family, per our offlist conversation) on > www.postgresql.org. The regional groups have their own websites and > use funding for their own purposes, so I believe its up to them to > recognise their own sponsors. > Exactly. At least this is what we are working on in the french-speaking users association. In a few days we will publish on postgresql.fr a web page with the listing of the sponsors ( although we rather use the terms "corporate members" ) along with the active contributors of the association. -- damien clochard http://dalibo.org | http://dalibo.com
Dave, > No, I don't think we do - we're only interested in sponsors of > postgresql.org (and possibly family, per our offlist conversation) on > www.postgresql.org. The regional groups have their own websites and > use funding for their own purposes, so I believe its up to them to > recognise their own sponsors. For financial sponsors, there's no way to give www.postgesql.org money. You can only give it to a regional group or SPI. That's why I was planning to offer consolidated listings of mid-to-upper -level donors on www.postgresql.org. --Josh
Josh, I meant the regionals. Obviously donations to postgresql.org go thru spi - only they should be listed on www.postgresql.org /D On 4/7/08, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: > Dave, > > > No, I don't think we do - we're only interested in sponsors of > > postgresql.org (and possibly family, per our offlist conversation) on > > www.postgresql.org. The regional groups have their own websites and > > use funding for their own purposes, so I believe its up to them to > > recognise their own sponsors. > > For financial sponsors, there's no way to give www.postgesql.org money. > You can only give it to a regional group or SPI. > > That's why I was planning to offer consolidated listings of mid-to-upper > -level donors on www.postgresql.org. > > --Josh > > -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Dave, > I meant the regionals. Obviously donations to postgresql.org go thru > spi - only they should be listed on www.postgresql.org I don't think it's fair counting only SPI for www.postgresql.org. Americans who donate to SPI get tax deductions, but citizens of other countries do not. -- --Josh Josh Berkus PostgreSQL @ Sun San Francisco
That's as maybe, but there's no other way for non USians to donate to postgresql.org than thru Spi. On 4/7/08, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: > Dave, > > > I meant the regionals. Obviously donations to postgresql.org go thru > > spi - only they should be listed on www.postgresql.org > > I don't think it's fair counting only SPI for www.postgresql.org. > Americans who donate to SPI get tax deductions, but citizens of other > countries do not. > > > -- > --Josh > > Josh Berkus > PostgreSQL @ Sun > San Francisco > -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 22:51:33 +0100 "Dave Page" <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: > That's as maybe, but there's no other way for non USians to donate to > postgresql.org than thru Spi. That would depend on what the definition is for donating to postgresql.org. Joshua D. Drake -- The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ United States PostgreSQL Association: http://www.postgresql.us/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
All, > "Dave Page" <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: > > That's as maybe, but there's no other way for non USians to donate to > > postgresql.org than thru Spi. > > That would depend on what the definition is for donating to > postgresql.org. My personal opinion is that donations to *any* community-owned PostgreSQL formally constituted NGO (including JPUG, SPI, PGUS, PGEU, ITPUG, PostgreSQL.Fr and PostgreSQL.Br) should be counted. -- --Josh Josh Berkus PostgreSQL @ Sun San Francisco