Folks,
First, change the subject line because I realized that I was mixing things up;
we're talking about "Contributors", "Sponsors" is something for another day.
Marc,
> And what would you like for JDBC? Every company that has someone involved
> in maintaining it? I know Dave Cramer is a big one, but there are others
> involved in JDBC as well, who are most likely doing it for 'corporate
> reasons' and on 'corporate time' ...
Lord almighty, we're not talking about giving people money. Or front-page
banner ads. We're talking about a "corporate contributor" listing page.
Why do you think that being listed on our web site is such a valuable
commodity that we need to ration it out like drawn blood?
As I pointed out, it benefits *us* to have more companies listed. Even up to
1000 companies. In fact, if we *had* 1000 companies to list, the Advocacy
volunteers could all take a vacation because our work would be done. I
doubt Linux could list 1000 companies.
So if Dave C. wants PostgreSQL International to be listed for his
contributions to JDBC, then why not? Where's the harm? An extra 1/2cm of
scrolling?
In order to list companies, they have to contribute something, and they have
to want to be listed. I'd be surprised if we end up with more than 30 even
under the most liberal policy.
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco