Subject: Re: merging advocacy and "overview"
From: Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
To: Omar Kilani <omar@tinysofa.org>
Cc: pgsql-www@postgresql.org
In-Reply-To: <41AF58EC.8070100@tinysofa.org>
References: <200412020046.01178.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
	<200412012237.58998.josh@agliodbs.com>
	<200412021025.46143.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
	<200412020939.37177.josh@agliodbs.com> <41AF58EC.8070100@tinysofa.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 02 Dec 2004 14:02:08 -0500
Message-Id: <1102014128.2441.76.camel@camel>
Mime-Version: 1.0

On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 13:03, Omar Kilani wrote:
> Josh Berkus said the following on 2/12/2004 12:39 PM:
> > Robert,
> >  
> >>the only reason to go with advocacy is due to it's replacing
> >>advocacy.postgresql.org;  ie. it's a community standard vs. industry
> >>standard.  
> > 
> > 
> > Sure.  However, I'm more concerned about the public & press being able to find 
> > things than long-term community members, who can always ask on IRC.  "About" 
> > is instantly understandable to web users;  "Advocacy" is not.
> > 
> > So, an example of "About", a la Omar:
> > http://postgresql.tinysofa.com/about/casestudies
> > 
> > I think this works.
> 
> Additionally, we've already restructured and pretty much finished the 
> whole site. And see no reason why it can't be in for the 15th of December.
> 

I see a number of things that need to changed, but nothing that seems
like a complete deal breaker. Omar, how long would it take you to work
up some patches for the work you have done? 


Robert Treat
-- 
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL