Folks,
looking at the out-of-date info on the developer listings, I'm thinking that
the sentence-long descriptions we have for each developer are a bit too long
for us to really maintain them. I think we should do this:
1) Divide the listings into 4 sections:
Core, Emeritus, Major Contributors, Contributors
2) List only people's names, countries, and (optionally, if the developer
wants it) employers.
2 might be amended to include single-word descriptions of their contributions.
Example:
Joe Conway, USA, Symer Inc., arrays, PL/pgSQL, PL/R.
With the one-word descriptions or not, it should get a *lot* easier to
maintain the list. In fact, it seems to me that it ought to be
databased ...
Also, I'm opposed to listing, say "Web","Advocacy", and "Related Projects" or
whatever contributors seperately. That once again leads to the implication
that some kinds of contributions are more valuable than others, and a lot of
the "less valuable" contributions nevertheless keep us running.
Thoughts? Aside from the fact that we need some rules on who's a "major
contributor" anyway?
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco