Обсуждение: Changes to about/sponsors
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello, Please review the following changes, patch is also attached: http://69.34.217.90/about/sponsors Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake - -- The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/ Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate SELECT 'Training', 'Consulting' FROM vendor WHERE name = 'CMD' -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHYamFATb/zqfZUUQRAi5mAJ4oDtbzM7gKo0R8QisEXyNzuOqrlQCeNP5w 6PB+oR8cVqwZtJim8GDIMXI= =g3GQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Вложения
Josh, > Please review the following changes, patch is also attached: > > http://69.34.217.90/about/sponsors Questions: What's the value in grouping by country? When did Skype move to Luxemborg? Does PostgreSQL, Inc. still exist? Marc? -- --Josh Josh Berkus PostgreSQL @ Sun San Francisco
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 15:09:14 -0800 Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: > Josh, > > > Please review the following changes, patch is also attached: > > > > http://69.34.217.90/about/sponsors > > Questions: > > What's the value in grouping by country? It has always been grouped by country. I just moved the country to the left so it was sorted left to right. > > When did Skype move to Luxemborg? > I changed no content. > Does PostgreSQL, Inc. still exist? Marc? > I removed them because of Hub. I know of know sponsorship that PostgreSQL, Inc. provides, but I do know that Hub provides. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake - -- The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/ Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate SELECT 'Training', 'Consulting' FROM vendor WHERE name = 'CMD' -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHYb1aATb/zqfZUUQRAjjHAJ9T2tMfYtPj/9N0uHzY2cwg+NG0xgCfbFwu zx8fHlH73nz9Kq+UsWq0D2U= =548A -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > Questions: Let's try this again :) > > What's the value in grouping by country? > It was always sorted by country. I just moved the country to the left so the sort key was read left to right. I felt it made it more readable. > When did Skype move to Luxemborg? > This was present in the original document. So I don't know. > Does PostgreSQL, Inc. still exist? Marc? > I do not know of any services PostgreSQL, Inc. provides to the community. Thus they were removed. I do know of services Hub.Org provides thus they weren't :). Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake - -- The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/ Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate SELECT 'Training', 'Consulting' FROM vendor WHERE name = 'CMD' -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHYcPNATb/zqfZUUQRAoUIAKCbUbqwrC8XouFA7AFwt0uaahwp7wCeO22e iKupMDK8XS4D7uRLhz7/ni4= =tmvP -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Josh, > It has always been grouped by country. I just moved the country to the > left so it was sorted left to right. Right. I just don't see why that's an improvement. Especially when a couple of those companies have addresses of convenience. -- --Josh Josh Berkus PostgreSQL @ Sun San Francisco
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 15:53:46 -0800 Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: > Josh, > > > It has always been grouped by country. I just moved the country to > > the left so it was sorted left to right. > > Right. I just don't see why that's an improvement. Especially when > a couple of those companies have addresses of convenience. The order by country didn't make visual sense before. It does now. The other option is to just order by name which I am also o.k. with but it is not consistent with the hosting/professional services listing which groups by region and then lists alphabetically. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake - -- The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/ Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate SELECT 'Training', 'Consulting' FROM vendor WHERE name = 'CMD' -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHYcahATb/zqfZUUQRAggvAKClePhE+8J4YHLc82tmRxsBnVLp/wCeKF7F kf7tmkyq2zzyRVbFJQz03bs= =pyck -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - --On Thursday, December 13, 2007 15:09:14 -0800 Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: > Josh, > >> Please review the following changes, patch is also attached: >> >> http://69.34.217.90/about/sponsors > > Questions: > > What's the value in grouping by country? > > When did Skype move to Luxemborg? > > Does PostgreSQL, Inc. still exist? Marc? Yes, most definitely ... else we forgot to tell our clients ... - ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFHYc9h4QvfyHIvDvMRAi+QAKDh5iuPDVQx86BUopz37yEdyVXxqQCfYtcm oBBi0cW4cewpxcrDE5WgWoU= =9cSS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Thursday 13 December 2007 16:52, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Hello, > > Please review the following changes, patch is also attached: > > http://69.34.217.90/about/sponsors > -1 -- Robert Treat Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
Robert Treat wrote: > On Thursday 13 December 2007 16:52, Joshua D. Drake wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Please review the following changes, patch is also attached: >> >> http://69.34.217.90/about/sponsors >> > > -1 Could you please provide feedback so we can improve the current situation. The current sort order is bizarre. Joshua D. Drake
Joshua D. Drake wrote:>>>>>> http://69.34.217.90/about/sponsors>> Questions:>>>> What's the value in grouping by country? Grouping by country is on the original page too. I personally like the new version which is ordered left to right better. But maybe we should make more radical change. For example completely random order (each hit, or new order every day or something like that) which I always felt is most fair way to list sponsors. This kind of change would require much more work tho. >>> When did Skype move to Luxemborg?>> Registered address of Skype Technologies S.A. is in Luxembourg (http://about.skype.com/) and I think it always was (better taxes maybe ? ;) ). -- Regards Petr Jelinek (PJMODOS)
On Thursday 13 December 2007 22:59, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Robert Treat wrote: > > On Thursday 13 December 2007 16:52, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> Please review the following changes, patch is also attached: > >> > >> http://69.34.217.90/about/sponsors > > > > -1 > > Could you please provide feedback so we can improve the current > situation. The current sort order is bizarre. > I don't think anyone outside of the web team has ever complained about the sort order, and I see no reason to change it. -- Robert Treat Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 02:15:29AM -0500, Robert Treat wrote: > On Thursday 13 December 2007 22:59, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > Robert Treat wrote: > > > On Thursday 13 December 2007 16:52, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > >> Hello, > > >> > > >> Please review the following changes, patch is also attached: > > >> > > >> http://69.34.217.90/about/sponsors > > > > > > -1 > > > > Could you please provide feedback so we can improve the current > > situation. The current sort order is bizarre. > > > > I don't think anyone outside of the web team has ever complained about the > sort order, and I see no reason to change it. I didn't notice it before ;-) But I do find it strange, so I'd be +1 for changing it, but don't really care how as long as it's logical. //Magnus
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 05:20:53AM +0100, Petr Jelinek wrote: > Joshua D. Drake wrote: > >>> > >>> http://69.34.217.90/about/sponsors > >> Questions: > >> > >> What's the value in grouping by country? > > Grouping by country is on the original page too. I personally like the > new version which is ordered left to right better. > But maybe we should make more radical change. For example completely > random order (each hit, or new order every day or something like that) > which I always felt is most fair way to list sponsors. This kind of > change would require much more work tho. This is not a bad idea at all. I like it. Sholdn't be very hard to db'ify it and do that, if we agree that's how it should be done. There are good examples to copy/paste from :-) //Magnus
Robert Treat wrote: > On Thursday 13 December 2007 22:59, Joshua D. Drake wrote: >> Robert Treat wrote: >>> On Thursday 13 December 2007 16:52, Joshua D. Drake wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> Please review the following changes, patch is also attached: >>>> >>>> http://69.34.217.90/about/sponsors >>> -1 >> Could you please provide feedback so we can improve the current >> situation. The current sort order is bizarre. >> > > I don't think anyone outside of the web team has ever complained about the > sort order, and I see no reason to change it. Fair enough but I disagree :) Joshua D. Drake
Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 05:20:53AM +0100, Petr Jelinek wrote: >> Joshua D. Drake wrote: >>>>> http://69.34.217.90/about/sponsors >>>> Questions: >>>> >>>> What's the value in grouping by country? >> Grouping by country is on the original page too. I personally like the >> new version which is ordered left to right better. >> But maybe we should make more radical change. For example completely >> random order (each hit, or new order every day or something like that) >> which I always felt is most fair way to list sponsors. This kind of >> change would require much more work tho. > > This is not a bad idea at all. I like it. > > Sholdn't be very hard to db'ify it and do that, if we agree that's how it > should be done. There are good examples to copy/paste from :-) hrm - I'm not so sure I like the idea of having a non deterministic sort order on more and more stuff. People tend to expect stuff ordered by something (in this case the left-to-right reading made the existing order a bit strange to understand) and I guess we would get questions along "what is it ordered by" afterwards. Stefan
All, -1 on the new format, but I can't say that I feel *that* strongly about it. -- --Josh Josh Berkus PostgreSQL @ Sun San Francisco
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Hello, > > Please review the following changes, patch is also attached: > > http://69.34.217.90/about/sponsors Getting back to this one... Is there any reason we should group this by country at all? Today we group by country without showing it, which is the worst possible combination, IMHO. JD's patch changes it so we properly show that we're grouping it by country. But why *are* we grouping it my country in the first place? This is sponsors to the Global Development Group, why do we care about what country they're in that much? I think we should just re-order them alphabetically, and keep the country column where it is now (when it's ordered alphabetically, it makes sense to keep it there)... Comments? //Magnus
Magnus Hagander wrote: > Joshua D. Drake wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Please review the following changes, patch is also attached: >> >> http://69.34.217.90/about/sponsors > > Getting back to this one... > > Is there any reason we should group this by country at all? Today we > group by country without showing it, which is the worst possible > combination, IMHO. JD's patch changes it so we properly show that we're > grouping it by country. But why *are* we grouping it my country in the > first place? This is sponsors to the Global Development Group, why do we > care about what country they're in that much? I think we should just > re-order them alphabetically, and keep the country column where it is > now (when it's ordered alphabetically, it makes sense to keep it there)... +1 /D
Dave Page wrote: > Magnus Hagander wrote: >> Joshua D. Drake wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> Please review the following changes, patch is also attached: >>> >>> http://69.34.217.90/about/sponsors >> Getting back to this one... >> >> Is there any reason we should group this by country at all? Today we >> group by country without showing it, which is the worst possible >> combination, IMHO. JD's patch changes it so we properly show that we're >> grouping it by country. But why *are* we grouping it my country in the >> first place? This is sponsors to the Global Development Group, why do we >> care about what country they're in that much? I think we should just >> re-order them alphabetically, and keep the country column where it is >> now (when it's ordered alphabetically, it makes sense to keep it there)... > > +1 I am fine with that as well. My patch was only to create a logical order based on the current sort. Obviously alphabetical makes more sense as a whole and I am 100% behind that. Would you like me to submit a patch for that or will you handle it? Joshua D. Drake > > /D >
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Dave Page wrote: >> Magnus Hagander wrote: >>> Joshua D. Drake wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> Please review the following changes, patch is also attached: >>>> >>>> http://69.34.217.90/about/sponsors >>> Getting back to this one... >>> >>> Is there any reason we should group this by country at all? Today we >>> group by country without showing it, which is the worst possible >>> combination, IMHO. JD's patch changes it so we properly show that we're >>> grouping it by country. But why *are* we grouping it my country in the >>> first place? This is sponsors to the Global Development Group, why do we >>> care about what country they're in that much? I think we should just >>> re-order them alphabetically, and keep the country column where it is >>> now (when it's ordered alphabetically, it makes sense to keep it >>> there)... >> >> +1 > > I am fine with that as well. My patch was only to create a logical order > based on the current sort. Obviously alphabetical makes more sense as a > whole and I am 100% behind that. > > Would you like me to submit a patch for that or will you handle it? If you have the time, please do. //Magnus
Magnus Hagander wrote: > Joshua D. Drake wrote: >> I am fine with that as well. My patch was only to create a logical order >> based on the current sort. Obviously alphabetical makes more sense as a >> whole and I am 100% behind that. >> >> Would you like me to submit a patch for that or will you handle it? > > If you have the time, please do. No problem. Joshua D. Drake
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - --On Sunday, December 30, 2007 18:16:30 +0000 Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org> wrote: >> Is there any reason we should group this by country at all? Today we >> group by country without showing it, which is the worst possible >> combination, IMHO. JD's patch changes it so we properly show that we're >> grouping it by country. But why *are* we grouping it my country in the >> first place? This is sponsors to the Global Development Group, why do we >> care about what country they're in that much? I think we should just >> re-order them alphabetically, and keep the country column where it is >> now (when it's ordered alphabetically, it makes sense to keep it there)... > > +1 Just curious, but having it visibly sorted by country, is there any possibility of provoking some sort of 'one up-mans-ship'? For somewhere like the US, not so much so, but smaller companies in smaller countries might view a competitor as having sponsored and decide to do so also ... I know that that is one of the fundraising 'tricks' that you see used on tv telethons and such "so and so sponsored $X and challenges others to meet or beat that" .. not saying to put that text on the site, mind you ... - ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFHd/mW4QvfyHIvDvMRAlDcAJ4j5Qx3K362YSp8Sqil0+M1+wiCugCgr1yc Ix+KQmSgTTMB7lbSTMJ1Td4= =pizV -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Sun, Dec 30, 2007 at 04:03:34PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > so much so, but smaller companies in smaller countries might view a > competitor as having sponsored and decide to do so also ... I know that > that is one of the fundraising 'tricks' that you see used on tv telethons > and such "so and so sponsored $X and challenges others to meet or beat > that" .. not saying to put that text on the site, mind you ... If we wanted to do that, we could do so when trying to get sponsorships. The sorting of the list for users is confusing when it's by country (how many of us know the primary incorporation location for most companies we know of?), and it's the users' ability to find things that is the most important, I think. A