Received: from localhost (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.187])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 457969FC50C;
	Fri, 10 Aug 2007 11:08:49 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 22181-06-3; Fri, 10 Aug 2007 11:08:37 -0300 (ADT)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5
Received: from developer.pgadmin.org (developer.pgadmin.org [63.246.23.140])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 095139FC4D9;
	Fri, 10 Aug 2007 11:08:42 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from snake.local ([62.232.55.118]) (authenticated bits=0)
	by developer.pgadmin.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7AE8g1V030797
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Fri, 10 Aug 2007 15:08:43 +0100
Message-ID: <46BC7167.4030408@postgresql.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 15:08:39 +0100
From: Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Macintosh/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
CC: PostgreSQL www <pgsql-www@postgresql.org>, pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Version differences
References: <46BC6812.1050808@postgresql.org>
	<46BC6D9E.7030505@commandprompt.com>
	<46BC6EFE.2060107@postgresql.org>
	<46BC70EA.60808@commandprompt.com>
In-Reply-To: <46BC70EA.60808@commandprompt.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.3
OpenPGP: url=http://www.pgadmin.org/pgp/davepage.pgp
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Archive-Number: 200708/124
X-Sequence-Number: 12365

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
>> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>> Dave Page wrote:
>>>> There is currently no way for a visitor to the website to what whats
>>>> cool and new in the latest major release. This info is in the main
>>>> announcement panel for a while after we release, but is gone as soon as
>>>> we have a conference or something.
>>>> Any ideas how we can best fix this?
>>> Personally, I believe we should only talk about the "latest" release on
>>> the front page and have "older releases" linked. 
>> Disagree - we should be linking to the latest point releases of each
>> supported branch. Many people just can't do a major upgrade every year.
> 
> Well sure, we are one of them ;). I am not saying hide the older
> releases but you don't see stuff about RHEL 3 (which is still supported)
> on redhat's front page.

No, but then you pay a lot of money for their auto-upgrade service to
tell you that updates are available for RHEL3...

/D