On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 3:20 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.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.