Re: List of "servers" missing the new build machine?

On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 3:20 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> > ... (credit for all machines are listed at who hosts them,
> > not who bought or donated them, the way it is now. The headline should
> > probably be updated to reflect that)
>
> If those are often different companies, wouldn't it be fair to have two
> columns? Certainly the hosters deserve credit, but so does whoever
> donated the hardware.
>

I think this is the *only* case that this happens, except for one box that
was purchased with SPI money and is hosted at hosters expense. Every other
case has the same one.

In the end, it's actually the hosting and the providing of the running
costs for hosting that's the biggest problem to get around to. Once that is
sorted it's usually easier to deal with the hardware. That's not true all
the way, but it's the bigger one.

But yes, either making it two columns or making the one column take
multiple providers in it would probably make sense in general. We
definitely don't want to avoid giving people credit, that's not why it's
the way it is -- it's mostly beause it hasn't been needed.

Then there's the general step of defining whatshould be on there. For
example, why do we have the RPM building box on there but not the DEB
building box... I think this page has generally been handed without a lot
of care for a while, so we should look over policies and whatnot.

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/>
Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>