Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by developer.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8D092E0040 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2008 00:20:34 -0300 (ADT) Received: from developer.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 79701-06 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2008 00:20:11 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from lists.commandprompt.com (host-159.commandprompt.net [207.173.203.159]) by developer.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 562672E0068 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2008 00:20:03 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [192.168.1.5] (or-69-34-217-90.sta.embarqhsd.net [69.34.217.90]) (authenticated bits=0) by lists.commandprompt.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m5C3LQH9025062 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 11 Jun 2008 20:21:27 -0700 Subject: Re: Proposal: pulling newsbytes from www.pgfoundry.org From: "Joshua D. Drake" To: Robert Treat Cc: pgsql-www@postgresql.org, Dave Page , Stefan Kaltenbrunner , Magnus Hagander , josh@agliodbs.com In-Reply-To: <200806112258.12540.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> References: <200806091539.00540.josh@agliodbs.com> <484E2F6A.4060605@kaltenbrunner.cc> <937d27e10806100058h531f7bf2i717037748159cff2@mail.gmail.com> <200806112258.12540.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Command Prompt, Inc. Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 20:20:45 -0700 Message-Id: <1213240845.1068.111.camel@jd-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (lists.commandprompt.com [207.173.203.159]); Wed, 11 Jun 2008 20:21:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200806/102 X-Sequence-Number: 15329 On Wed, 2008-06-11 at 22:58 -0400, Robert Treat wrote: > On Tuesday 10 June 2008 03:58:40 Dave Page wrote: > > I'm not convinced that merging them is such a hot idea anyway. It will > > likely seriously reduce the amount of time any announcement gets front > > page time which will in turn reduce the usefulness of the section. > > Further, we then have a potential problem ensuring we don't get > > duplicate items when one gets approved on www and subsequently on > > pgFoundry. That of course, applies whether we merge the feed with the > > existing news, or add it as a new section (ignoring the layout issues > > that would involve!) > > > > The other concern that I have is that this gives even less face time to core > project related news, which already has a hard time getting exposure. Things > like minor releases, project events (beta/gsoc), and large community > gatherings (oscon/pgcon) get at best limited exposure and that's if aren't > just lumped in with everything else. OSCON and PGCON are responsible for their own promotion. As pgfoundry is an official PostgreSQL supported project, it deserves more face time than either of those two. One option would be to have: PostgreSQL News * Core * PgFoundry * Releases Related News * OSCON * PgCon * West * East etc... Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake