| From: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Magnus Hagander" <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
| Cc: | <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "Stefan Kaltenbrunner" <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, "Dave Page" <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>,<pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Time to update list of contributors |
| Date: | 2007-11-28 18:33:52 |
| Message-ID: | 474D602F.EE98.0025.0@wicourts.gov |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-www |
>>> On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 11:34 AM, in message <474DA6C1(dot)4070605(at)hagander(dot)net>,
Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> We don't generally add anybody who just provides a single patch, ever.
> They go in the release notes, but we only add people who've been around
> for a while to this list at all.
I'm not sure what the point of the list is, but I had assumed that
one reason for publishing it was to show the scope of the community.
Wouldn't advocacy be better served by listing all the contributors,
even those who have contributed for the first time in that release?
Is there some risk there that I'm missing, a matter of the effort
to gather the information, or to avoid offending more regular
contributors?
-Kevin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2007-11-28 18:39:55 | Re: [HACKERS] Time to update list of contributors |
| Previous Message | ohp | 2007-11-28 18:30:57 | Re: jaguar is up |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2007-11-28 18:39:55 | Re: [HACKERS] Time to update list of contributors |
| Previous Message | Devrim GÜNDÜZ | 2007-11-28 18:25:17 | Yet another reason to remove ads from archives website |