X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.2])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id B2A02D1B524; Sun,  9 Nov 2003 21:31:33 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 50544-08; Sun,  9 Nov 2003 17:31:03 -0400 (AST)
Received: from ganymede.hub.org (u46n208.hfx.eastlink.ca [24.222.46.208])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id AA1C5D1B515; Sun,  9 Nov 2003 17:31:01 -0400 (AST)
Received: by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id DCA2335F81; Sun,  9 Nov 2003 17:28:49 -0400 (AST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id D9DF7354AF; Sun,  9 Nov 2003 17:28:49 -0400 (AST)
Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 17:28:49 -0400 (AST)
From: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>
X-X-Sender: scrappy@ganymede.hub.org
To: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Cc: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>,
	Andreas GrabmXller <webmaster@letzplay.de>, pgsql-www@postgresql.org,
	grzm@myrealbox.com
Subject: Re: CSS and XHTML
In-Reply-To: <200311091305.33786.josh@agliodbs.com>
Message-ID: <20031109172557.U727@ganymede.hub.org>
References: <504D1003-12C1-11D8-A551-0005029FC1A7@myrealbox.com>
	<20031109194935.9513.qmail@osiris.gamecrashnet.de>
	<20031109160514.Q727@ganymede.hub.org>
	<200311091305.33786.josh@agliodbs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org
X-Archive-Number: 200311/105
X-Sequence-Number: 2752



On Sun, 9 Nov 2003, Josh Berkus wrote:

> Marc, Andreas:
>
> > > You are right, I just don't know who decides what here ;) And I don't
> > > know who is responsible for the advocacy and developer sites...
> >
> > I'd say that Advocacy falls under Josh et al ... developer tends to be an
> > enigma (nobody really maintains it) ....
>
> Robert is the lead on Advocacy.  I've no objections to making Advocacy
> the "press" page for a united site.  However, Robert may have some
> objections, I don't know.  Robert, FWIW, taking this united approach
> would silence some of the objections of Peter and some of the other core
> Hackers who don't like advocacy in its current form.

Just a side note ... even with a 'merged site', there should be no reason
why we can't have 'advocacy.postgresql.org' point to the lead page for
that section ... same with developer ... I think the thing I don't like
about the current advocacy site is that it doesn't have the 'glitz' that
one generally sees from a marketing perspective ...