Thread: [pgsql-www] Recognition Guidelines Patch
Hi, The PostgreSQL Core Committee put together guidelines for recognizing PostgreSQL NPOs and community conferences. I haveassembled these guidelines into the attached patch. Because the language in most of the patch has been approved by core, please *do not* review the language within the guidelinesthemselves. Things like code, linking, typos etc. are still fair game. If I do not hear any objections by EOD Aug 1, I will apply the patch to -www. Thanks! Jonathan -- Sent via pgsql-www mailing list (pgsql-www@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-www
Attachment
has put together a set of guidelines to fairly recognise these contributions to the commuity.</p>
commity -> community
Dave Cramer
On 29 July 2017 at 09:41, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:
Hi,
The PostgreSQL Core Committee put together guidelines for recognizing PostgreSQL NPOs and community conferences. I have assembled these guidelines into the attached patch.
Because the language in most of the patch has been approved by core, please *do not* review the language within the guidelines themselves. Things like code, linking, typos etc. are still fair game.
If I do not hear any objections by EOD Aug 1, I will apply the patch to -www.
Thanks!
Jonathan
--
Sent via pgsql-www mailing list (pgsql-www@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-www
On 2017-07-29 18:41, Jonathan S. Katz wrote: > Things like code, linking, typos etc. are still fair game. 'your are donating' should be 'you are donating' 'from the the organisers' should be 'from the organisers'
Jonathan, * Jonathan S. Katz (jkatz@postgresql.org) wrote: > The PostgreSQL Core Committee put together guidelines for recognizing PostgreSQL NPOs and community conferences. I haveassembled these guidelines into the attached patch. Thanks for working on this. One thing I noticed (not already mentioned by others) "focussed" should be "focused", I believe. Thanks again! Stephen
> On Jul 29, 2017, at 1:50 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote: > > Jonathan, > > * Jonathan S. Katz (jkatz@postgresql.org) wrote: >> The PostgreSQL Core Committee put together guidelines for recognizing PostgreSQL NPOs and community conferences. I haveassembled these guidelines into the attached patch. > > Thanks for working on this. > > One thing I noticed (not already mentioned by others) > > "focussed" should be "focused", I believe. > > Thanks again! Thanks for the help. Attached is the patch with typo fixes. Jonathan -- Sent via pgsql-www mailing list (pgsql-www@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-www
Attachment
On 07/29/2017 12:16 PM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote: > Thanks for the help. Attached is the patch with typo fixes. It isn't actually part of your patch, but it seems to me we should not have questions with respect to donations sent to an individual. I.e. we should replace: --- href="mailto:jdrake@PostgreSQL.org">PostgreSQL fund raising contact --- with something like --- href="mailto:funds-group@postgresql.org">PostgreSQL funds group --- Joe -- Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development
* Joe Conway (mail@joeconway.com) wrote: > On 07/29/2017 12:16 PM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote: > > Thanks for the help. Attached is the patch with typo fixes. > > It isn't actually part of your patch, but it seems to me we should not > have questions with respect to donations sent to an individual. I.e. we > should replace: > > --- > href="mailto:jdrake@PostgreSQL.org">PostgreSQL fund raising contact > --- > > with something like > > --- > href="mailto:funds-group@postgresql.org">PostgreSQL funds group > --- +1. Thanks! Stephen
Hi Joe & Stephen,
On Jul 30, 2017, at 3:52 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:* Joe Conway (mail@joeconway.com) wrote:On 07/29/2017 12:16 PM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:Thanks for the help. Attached is the patch with typo fixes.
It isn't actually part of your patch, but it seems to me we should not
have questions with respect to donations sent to an individual. I.e. we
should replace:
---
href="mailto:jdrake@PostgreSQL.org">PostgreSQL fund raising contact
---
with something like
---
href="mailto:funds-group@postgresql.org">PostgreSQL funds group
---
+1.
I think this is a valid request and I would +1 it too, however I would like to push implementation to a different patch / thread as AFAIK there needs to be a “funds group” set up.
Thanks!
Jonathan
> On Jul 30, 2017, at 13:36, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote: > I think this is a valid request and I would +1 it too, however I would like to push implementation to a different patch/ thread as AFAIK there needs to be a “funds group” set up. If there is consensus that having the group is a good idea, I'd recommend not pushing this patch until it is set up, ratherthan having it go up once with an individual and then again with a mailing list. It seems fairly straight-forwardto set up the group; is there a reason we can't hold the patch for that administrative task? -- -- Christophe Pettus xof@thebuild.com
On 07/30/2017 01:40 PM, Christophe Pettus wrote: > >> On Jul 30, 2017, at 13:36, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote: >> I think this is a valid request and I would +1 it too, however I would like to push implementation to a different patch/ thread as AFAIK there needs to be a “funds group” set up. > > If there is consensus that having the group is a good idea, I'd recommend not pushing this patch until it is set up, ratherthan having it go up once with an individual and then again with a mailing list. It seems fairly straight-forwardto set up the group; is there a reason we can't hold the patch for that administrative task? The PostgreSQL Funds Group already exists and has a mailing list at that address (funds-group <funds-group@postgresql.org>) https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGFGCharter https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGFGMembers Joe -- Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development
> On Jul 30, 2017, at 14:04, Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> wrote: > > The PostgreSQL Funds Group already exists and has a mailing list at that > address (funds-group <funds-group@postgresql.org>) > > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGFGCharter > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGFGMembers Well, that was straight-forward! -- -- Christophe Pettus xof@thebuild.com
> On Jul 30, 2017, at 5:04 PM, Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> wrote: > > On 07/30/2017 01:40 PM, Christophe Pettus wrote: >> >>> On Jul 30, 2017, at 13:36, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote: >>> I think this is a valid request and I would +1 it too, however I would like to push implementation to a different patch/ thread as AFAIK there needs to be a “funds group” set up. >> >> If there is consensus that having the group is a good idea, I'd recommend not pushing this patch until it is set up, ratherthan having it go up once with an individual and then again with a mailing list. It seems fairly straight-forwardto set up the group; is there a reason we can't hold the patch for that administrative task? > > The PostgreSQL Funds Group already exists and has a mailing list at that > address (funds-group <funds-group@postgresql.org>) > > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGFGCharter > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGFGMembers Ah, I did not know. Perfect! I will add it to the patch. Jonathan
On Jul 30, 2017, at 5:06 PM, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:
On Jul 30, 2017, at 5:04 PM, Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> wrote:
On 07/30/2017 01:40 PM, Christophe Pettus wrote:On Jul 30, 2017, at 13:36, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:
I think this is a valid request and I would +1 it too, however I would like to push implementation to a different patch / thread as AFAIK there needs to be a “funds group” set up.
If there is consensus that having the group is a good idea, I'd recommend not pushing this patch until it is set up, rather than having it go up once with an individual and then again with a mailing list. It seems fairly straight-forward to set up the group; is there a reason we can't hold the patch for that administrative task?
The PostgreSQL Funds Group already exists and has a mailing list at that
address (funds-group <funds-group@postgresql.org>)
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGFGCharter
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGFGMembers
Ah, I did not know. Perfect! I will add it to the patch.
Included email address update attached.
Attachment
> On 30 Jul 2017, at 23:09, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote: > >> On Jul 30, 2017, at 5:06 PM, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote: >> >>> On Jul 30, 2017, at 5:04 PM, Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> wrote: >>> >>> On 07/30/2017 01:40 PM, Christophe Pettus wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Jul 30, 2017, at 13:36, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote: >>>>> I think this is a valid request and I would +1 it too, however I would like to push implementation to a different patch/ thread as AFAIK there needs to be a “funds group” set up. >>>> >>>> If there is consensus that having the group is a good idea, I'd recommend not pushing this patch until it is set up,rather than having it go up once with an individual and then again with a mailing list. It seems fairly straight-forwardto set up the group; is there a reason we can't hold the patch for that administrative task? >>> >>> The PostgreSQL Funds Group already exists and has a mailing list at that >>> address (funds-group <funds-group@postgresql.org>) >>> >>> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGFGCharter >>> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGFGMembers >> >> Ah, I did not know. Perfect! I will add it to the patch. > > Included email address update attached. A <ul> is not allowed inside a <p>, just removing the paragraph blocks around the <ul> is fine in these cases: +<p>+ <ul> While not technically part of this patch, since you’re in here working on the community section you can change the PGEU Donate link (in the last unchanged line of this hunk) to use https since it will redirect there anyways: -<p>PostgreSQL Europe is a European region non profit focusing on the support of other PostgreSQL groups in Europe.+<p>PostgreSQLEurope is a European region non profit focusing on the support of other PostgreSQL groups in Europe.You may also use this link to donate to specific European groups such as those in Germany or the United Kingdom. <ahref="http://www.PostgreSQL.eu/donate">Donate to PostgreSQL Europe.</a></p> The rest looks good. cheers ./daniel
On 29 July 2017 at 17:41, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote: > Hi, > > The PostgreSQL Core Committee put together guidelines for recognizing PostgreSQL NPOs and community conferences. I haveassembled these guidelines into the attached patch. > > Because the language in most of the patch has been approved by core, please *do not* review the language within the guidelinesthemselves. Things like code, linking, typos etc. are still fair game. > > If I do not hear any objections by EOD Aug 1, I will apply the patch to -www. > > Thanks! Thanks for taking the time to produce these. I personally welcome some guidelines for conferences, so that we can run conferences that support the open source PostgreSQL community in an open and even-handed way as has been successfully achieved in PGEU (and maybe others elsewhere also). PgDay UK 2018 procedures will need to change to suit, since only Dave and myself discussed talk selection and that would no longer be allowed. No problem here. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
> On Jul 30, 2017, at 6:28 PM, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote: > >> On 30 Jul 2017, at 23:09, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote: >> >>> On Jul 30, 2017, at 5:06 PM, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote: >>> >>>> On Jul 30, 2017, at 5:04 PM, Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 07/30/2017 01:40 PM, Christophe Pettus wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Jul 30, 2017, at 13:36, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote: >>>>>> I think this is a valid request and I would +1 it too, however I would like to push implementation to a differentpatch / thread as AFAIK there needs to be a “funds group” set up. >>>>> >>>>> If there is consensus that having the group is a good idea, I'd recommend not pushing this patch until it is set up,rather than having it go up once with an individual and then again with a mailing list. It seems fairly straight-forwardto set up the group; is there a reason we can't hold the patch for that administrative task? >>>> >>>> The PostgreSQL Funds Group already exists and has a mailing list at that >>>> address (funds-group <funds-group@postgresql.org>) >>>> >>>> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGFGCharter >>>> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGFGMembers >>> >>> Ah, I did not know. Perfect! I will add it to the patch. >> >> Included email address update attached. > > A <ul> is not allowed inside a <p>, just removing the paragraph blocks around > the <ul> is fine in these cases: > > +<p> > + <ul> Understood. I did have that before, however the formatting on the page was more bunched together and was less readable. > While not technically part of this patch, since you’re in here working on the > community section you can change the PGEU Donate link (in the last unchanged > line of this hunk) to use https since it will redirect there anyways: > > -<p>PostgreSQL Europe is a European region non profit focusing on the support of other PostgreSQL groups in Europe. > +<p>PostgreSQL Europe is a European region non profit focusing on the support of other PostgreSQL groups in Europe. > You may also use this link to donate to specific European groups such as those in Germany or the > United Kingdom. <a href="http://www.PostgreSQL.eu/donate">Donate to PostgreSQL Europe.</a></p> I will make the change. Thanks! Jonathan
On Aug 1, 2017, at 4:40 PM, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:
On Jul 30, 2017, at 6:28 PM, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote:On 30 Jul 2017, at 23:09, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:On Jul 30, 2017, at 5:06 PM, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:On Jul 30, 2017, at 5:04 PM, Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> wrote:
On 07/30/2017 01:40 PM, Christophe Pettus wrote:On Jul 30, 2017, at 13:36, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:
I think this is a valid request and I would +1 it too, however I would like to push implementation to a different patch / thread as AFAIK there needs to be a “funds group” set up.
If there is consensus that having the group is a good idea, I'd recommend not pushing this patch until it is set up, rather than having it go up once with an individual and then again with a mailing list. It seems fairly straight-forward to set up the group; is there a reason we can't hold the patch for that administrative task?
The PostgreSQL Funds Group already exists and has a mailing list at that
address (funds-group <funds-group@postgresql.org>)
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGFGCharter
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGFGMembers
Ah, I did not know. Perfect! I will add it to the patch.
Included email address update attached.
A <ul> is not allowed inside a <p>, just removing the paragraph blocks around
the <ul> is fine in these cases:
+<p>
+ <ul>
Understood. I did have that before, however the formatting on the page was more bunched together and was less readable.While not technically part of this patch, since you’re in here working on the
community section you can change the PGEU Donate link (in the last unchanged
line of this hunk) to use https since it will redirect there anyways:
-<p>PostgreSQL Europe is a European region non profit focusing on the support of other PostgreSQL groups in Europe.
+<p>PostgreSQL Europe is a European region non profit focusing on the support of other PostgreSQL groups in Europe.
You may also use this link to donate to specific European groups such as those in Germany or the
United Kingdom. <a href="http://www.PostgreSQL.eu/donate">Donate to PostgreSQL Europe.</a></p>
I will make the change.
Changes attached. I will be pushing this up before EOD.
Thank you again everyone for your feedback!
Jonathan
Attachment
> Hi, > > The PostgreSQL Core Committee put together guidelines for recognizing PostgreSQL NPOs and community conferences. I haveassembled these guidelines into the attached patch. > > Because the language in most of the patch has been approved by core, please *do not* review the language within the guidelinesthemselves. Things like code, linking, typos etc. are still fair game. > > If I do not hear any objections by EOD Aug 1, I will apply the patch to -www. > > Thanks! > > Jonathan What would happen to the conference events already listed at https://www.postgresql.org/about/event? Are they going to be removed if the organizer of a conference does not agree with this? Best regards, -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS, Inc. Japan English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
On 08/01/2017 04:06 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: >> Hi, >> >> The PostgreSQL Core Committee put together guidelines for recognizing PostgreSQL NPOs and community conferences. I haveassembled these guidelines into the attached patch. >> >> Because the language in most of the patch has been approved by core, please *do not* review the language within the guidelinesthemselves. Things like code, linking, typos etc. are still fair game. >> >> If I do not hear any objections by EOD Aug 1, I will apply the patch to -www. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Jonathan > > What would happen to the conference events already listed at > https://www.postgresql.org/about/event? Are they going to be removed > if the organizer of a conference does not agree with this? As I understand it, no. It appears that instead there will essentially be two classes of conferences. 1. Recognized .Org conferences (those that follow the .Org guidelines) 2. Everyone else (who would still be subject to the event posting rules but not subject to the "Recognized" .Org conference guidelines. My guess is that #1 will have some level of preferential treatment on the website. Thanks, JD > > Best regards, > -- > Tatsuo Ishii > SRA OSS, Inc. Japan > English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php > Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp > > -- Command Prompt, Inc. || http://the.postgres.company/ || @cmdpromptinc PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development. Advocate: @amplifypostgres || Learn: https://pgconf.us ***** Unless otherwise stated, opinions are my own. *****
>> What would happen to the conference events already listed at >> https://www.postgresql.org/about/event? Are they going to be removed >> if the organizer of a conference does not agree with this? > > As I understand it, no. It appears that instead there will essentially > be two classes of conferences. > > 1. Recognized .Org conferences (those that follow the .Org guidelines) > > 2. Everyone else (who would still be subject to the event posting > rules but not subject to the "Recognized" .Org conference guidelines. > > My guess is that #1 will have some level of preferential treatment on > the website. Ok. So only new event submissions after August 1 will be classified into #1 or #2. My guess is, existing events are classified into #2 regardless whether they satisfy the .Org guidelines or not. Best regards, -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS, Inc. Japan English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
Hi Tatsuo,
On Aug 1, 2017, at 7:06 PM, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@sraoss.co.jp> wrote:Hi,
The PostgreSQL Core Committee put together guidelines for recognizing PostgreSQL NPOs and community conferences. I have assembled these guidelines into the attached patch.
Because the language in most of the patch has been approved by core, please *do not* review the language within the guidelines themselves. Things like code, linking, typos etc. are still fair game.
If I do not hear any objections by EOD Aug 1, I will apply the patch to -www.
Thanks!
Jonathan
What would happen to the conference events already listed at
https://www.postgresql.org/about/event? Are they going to be removed
if the organizer of a conference does not agree with this?
The guidelines for events are not about what is listed on the events page, those are available here: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/NewsEventsApproval#Approving_Events_and_Event-Related_News_.28excluding_training.29
The guidelines are for recognizing what constitutes a *community* event versus an event about PostgreSQL, i.e. this sentence:
> Events that do not meet the criteria will still be welcomed (where appropriate under the general listing policies) -
> for example, events organised by a single company which may still be valuable for people to attend, but are
> not necessarily what we would consider fully “open.”
Best,
Jonathan
>> What would happen to the conference events already listed at >> https://www.postgresql.org/about/event? Are they going to be removed >> if the organizer of a conference does not agree with this? > > The guidelines for events are not about what is listed on the events page, those are available here: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/NewsEventsApproval#Approving_Events_and_Event-Related_News_.28excluding_training.29 <https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/NewsEventsApproval#Approving_Events_and_Event-Related_News_.28excluding_training.29> Isn't that for approving posts to pgsql-announce? > The guidelines are for recognizing what constitutes a *community* event versus an event about PostgreSQL, i.e. this sentence: > > > Events that do not meet the criteria will still be welcomed (where appropriate under the general listing policies)- > > for example, events organised by a single company which may still be valuable for people to attend, but are > > not necessarily what we would consider fully “open.” > > Best, > > Jonathan > > As I understand it, no. It appears that instead there will essentially > be two classes of conferences. > > 1. Recognized .Org conferences (those that follow the .Org guidelines) > > 2. Everyone else (who would still be subject to the event posting > rules but not subject to the "Recognized" .Org conference guidelines. So, "community event" constitutes #1 and will be on the website different from what we have now? > My guess is that #1 will have some level of preferential treatment on > the website. Best regards, -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS, Inc. Japan English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
> On Aug 1, 2017, at 10:26 PM, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@sraoss.co.jp> wrote: > >>> What would happen to the conference events already listed at >>> https://www.postgresql.org/about/event? Are they going to be removed >>> if the organizer of a conference does not agree with this? >> >> The guidelines for events are not about what is listed on the events page, those are available here: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/NewsEventsApproval#Approving_Events_and_Event-Related_News_.28excluding_training.29 <https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/NewsEventsApproval#Approving_Events_and_Event-Related_News_.28excluding_training.29> > > Isn't that for approving posts to pgsql-announce? And what goes on the events page on .org. This the guide I have been using for X years I have been helping to moderate. > >> The guidelines are for recognizing what constitutes a *community* event versus an event about PostgreSQL, i.e. this sentence: >> >> > Events that do not meet the criteria will still be welcomed (where appropriate under the general listing policies)- >> > for example, events organised by a single company which may still be valuable for people to attend, but are >> > not necessarily what we would consider fully “open.” >> >> Best, >> >> Jonathan >> > >> As I understand it, no. It appears that instead there will essentially >> be two classes of conferences. >> >> 1. Recognized .Org conferences (those that follow the .Org guidelines) >> >> 2. Everyone else (who would still be subject to the event posting >> rules but not subject to the "Recognized" .Org conference guidelines. > > So, "community event" constitutes #1 and will be on the website > different from what we have now? Nothing is changing on what is being published to the website right now, it is still following the aforementioned link Iposted. Thanks, Jonathan
> On Aug 1, 2017, at 19:29, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote: > > And what goes on the events page on .org. This the guide I have been using for X years I have been helping to moderate. I am curious, though: Is the intention to have a "Community Events" / "Other Events" section on the web site, to allow eventsthat qualify as "community" events to so market themselves without a distinction on the site, or has this not beendecided yet? -- -- Christophe Pettus xof@thebuild.com
>> So, "community event" constitutes #1 and will be on the website >> different from what we have now? > > Nothing is changing on what is being published to the website right now, it is still following the aforementioned linkI posted. Ok, in my understanding the only way to be recognized by users that the event is a "community event" is, for the organizers to stat the "we are PostgreSQL community event" by themselves. Best regards, -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS, Inc. Japan English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp