On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 20:51, Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote: > On tor, 2011-06-30 at 15:09 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >> Robert Hass (whose name I misspelled in the commit message above) just >> mentioned to me (in an answer to my apologizing about it) that he >> didn't think that mentioning sponsors for patch development was a good >> idea. >> >> I don't think we have a policy for this, but I have done it for some >> time now and nobody has complained, so I sort of assumed it was okay. >> Besides, some of the people pouring the money in does care about it; >> moreover, it provides a little incentive for other companies that >> might also be in a position to fund development but lack the "peer >> approval" of the idea, or a final little push. > > I think commit messages should be restricted to describing what was > changed and who is responsible for it. Once we open it for things like
+1. > sponsorship, what's to stop people from adding personal messages, what > they had for breakfast, "currently listening to", or just selling > advertising space in each commit message for 99 cents? Well, listing the sponsor pretty much *is* selling advertising space... Though I hope it was more than 99 cents ;) We definitely need a good venue for advertising sponsorship of features, but I don't think the commit message is that. (Also, a lot of the commit messages would contain "feature sponsored by redhat" for example - else we'd exclude those who invest a *lot* of time and money in postgres while promoting those that spend money on single and/or smaller things..) -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
