| From: | "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Christophe Pettus <xof(at)thebuild(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, PostgreSQL WWW <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Recognition Guidelines Patch |
| Date: | 2017-07-30 21:06:21 |
| Message-ID: | 033285F8-7577-4EAA-A508-519FC78921CC@postgresql.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-www |
> On Jul 30, 2017, at 5:04 PM, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On 07/30/2017 01:40 PM, Christophe Pettus wrote:
>>
>>> On Jul 30, 2017, at 13:36, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)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(at)postgresql(dot)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
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jonathan S. Katz | 2017-07-30 21:09:37 | Re: Recognition Guidelines Patch |
| Previous Message | Christophe Pettus | 2017-07-30 21:05:51 | Re: Recognition Guidelines Patch |