X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 209F29DD77D for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2005 16:18:47 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 10587-04 for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2005 16:18:43 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (server227.ethosmedia.com [209.128.84.227]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CE9B9DD77F for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2005 16:18:43 -0400 (AST) X-EthosMedia-Virus-Scanned: no infections found Received: from [64.81.245.111] (account josh@agliodbs.com HELO [192.168.2.3]) by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP id 8631500; Fri, 02 Dec 2005 12:21:21 -0800 From: Josh Berkus Reply-To: josh@agliodbs.com Organization: Aglio Database Solutions To: Robert Treat Subject: Re: Launching PostgreSQL KB Project Mark 2 Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 12:23:35 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 Cc: pgsql-www@postgresql.org References: <43908C03.5040205@agliodbs.com> <1133553804.4491.321.camel@camel> In-Reply-To: <1133553804.4491.321.camel@camel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200512021223.36176.josh@agliodbs.com> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 required=5 tests=[none] X-Spam-Score: 0 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200512/28 X-Sequence-Number: 8969 Robert, > If we are going to discuss adding a KB to the postgresql.org sites, > shouldn't we discuss it right here? No, for two reasons: (1) the KB project includes contacts for some corporate supporters who aren't prepared for the "attitude" common from some posters on this (and other) main postgresql mailing lists, and (2) this list is too large and diffuse to make decisions quickly on a narrowly defined project. For those reasons, we're going to use a seperate mailing list to do the detailed planning and coordinate with this list over integration, infrastructure, and *broad* goals. In other words, I'm happy to discuss *whether* to add the KB we build to PostgreSQL.org here, but not how to build it. > And didn't we have this discussion > of requirements once already before Gevik looked into drupal? I reviewed that thread, which was talking strictly about recreating Techdocs. The KB will be something slightly different. Also, many of the present participants weren't there for that discussion. > And what does > that project have to do with the kb? From what I have looked at it > before, it was a .net based cms software, has the direction of that > project changed? I'm confused. Well, according to Gevik it's a tool for building KBs. Whether or not it meets our requirements, I don't know, since the requirements aren't yet defined. -- --Josh Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco