Subject: Re: On-line docs for PG 8.1 need updating
From: Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>
To: Michael Glaesemann <grzm@myrealbox.com>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <mha@sollentuna.net>,
	Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>,
	PostgreSQL WWW Mailing List <pgsql-www@postgresql.org>
In-Reply-To: <5407F6D0-63F5-43D4-80B8-74C29C28B66B@myrealbox.com>
References: <6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCE92E826@algol.sollentuna.se>
	<1131313608.6884.86.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<5407F6D0-63F5-43D4-80B8-74C29C28B66B@myrealbox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 15:43:13 -0500
Message-Id: <1131396193.6884.108.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 11:03 +0900, Michael Glaesemann wrote:
> I agree with your points. One reservation I have is that people might  
> be more likely to run a beta in a production environment. Nowadays it  
> seems increasingly common for projects to release betas for  
> widespread circulation. I don't know if this is something that should  
> be encouraged for PostgreSQL. I'd hate to see people get a bad  
> impression of PostgreSQL because a beta screws up their data.

IMHO it is fairly clearly a good thing to get more publicity for
Postgres betas. That is the whole point of the beta program in the first
place: I don't see that putting more beta information on the main
website is fundamentally different from sending email announcing betas
to -announce, for example. Provided that the caveats are clear, I think
there's a lot to be gained by publicizing betas more effectively.

-Neil