Re: Vote on Windows installer links
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Vote on Windows installer links |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200907091728.09525.peter_e@gmx.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Vote on Windows installer links (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Vote on Windows installer links
|
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
On Thursday 09 July 2009 16:34:18 Simon Riggs wrote: > Are we really in a position where we are forced to accept advertising > from a company because they run what we consider to be a critical part > of the project? Is that the only alternative? By the way, a quick look around shows that there are a few other instances of advertisement on PostgreSQL sites. On www.p.o you have a link to the "server sponsors" and to tinysofa (not sure if they are a commercial entity). archives.p.o and buildfarm.p.o have "hosted by Command Prompt" or some variant. (Plus the buildfarm is sure to repeat that on just about every page.) There is some imbalance here. Because these web sites (and the installer) are the frontends that are exposed to the user, as opposed to code, letting those who create and manage these aspects stick their name there could give them an amount of exposure that is not proportional to the amount of contribution to the overall project effort. That is further skewed because we have a fairly restrictive policy on the extent to which individuals and companies are credited in code and release notes. (Yes, there is a list of project sponsors, but that isn't really easy to find, let alone stumble upon. Plus I think it's pretty bogus.) This is an uneasy peace. If I wanted to, for example, I could stick my name or the name of my sponsors on a lot of things in PostgreSQL, because I technically host or manage them or have the ability to edit the relevant HTML or text files. Or if you want to get easy exposure, I think the easiest way is to just start hosting things. There isn't a good way out of this except requiring that all PostgreSQL things be hosted on postgresql.org servers and are not branded or otherwise decorated with third party labels, and that everything else is explicitly marked as "third party". This could be done, but will this degrade the user experience? In the meantime, I suggest you follow the revised version of the old saying: "If you can't beat them, join them, then beat them." ;-)
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: