Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.208.211])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B84A633A2E;
	Sun,  8 Mar 2009 05:28:24 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.211]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 99387-06; Sun,  8 Mar 2009 05:28:18 -0300 (ADT)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from sraihb2.sra.co.jp (sraihb2.sra.co.jp [202.32.10.6])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4643635007;
	Sun,  8 Mar 2009 04:51:15 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from srascd.sra.co.jp (srascd [133.137.8.67])
	by sraihb2.sra.co.jp (Postfix) with SMTP id 613852A1662;
	Sun,  8 Mar 2009 16:51:11 +0900 (JST)
Received: from (srascb.sra.co.jp [133.137.8.65]) by srascd.sra.co.jp with smtp
	id 62b6_e4582444_0bb5_11de_bc24_001d096c5d65;
	Sun, 08 Mar 2009 16:51:11 +0900
Received: from sranhm.sra.co.jp (sranhm [133.137.16.38])
	by srascb.sra.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81261110C71;
	Sun,  8 Mar 2009 16:51:11 +0900 (JST)
Received: from localhost (sraihb-hub.sra.co.jp [133.137.8.6])
	by sranhm.sra.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39FE058080;
	Sun,  8 Mar 2009 16:51:11 +0900 (JST)
Date: Sun, 08 Mar 2009 16:51:01 +0900 (JST)
Message-Id: <20090308.165101.27803556.t-ishii@sraoss.co.jp>
To: stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc
Cc: pgsql-www@postgresql.org, pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: the sad state of our FAQs
From: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org>
In-Reply-To: <49B27F0E.2050504@kaltenbrunner.cc>
References: <49B27F0E.2050504@kaltenbrunner.cc>
X-Mailer: Mew version 4.2 on Emacs 21.4 / Mule 5.0
	=?iso-2022-jp?B?KBskQjgtTFobKEIp?=
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200903/38
X-Sequence-Number: 16692

> My proposal is to move all the FAQs to the wiki(just with what happened 
> with the developer FAQ) with the hope that more people get interested in 
>   keeping them up to date and only reference those on the main page that 
> at least contains "somewhat" accurate information.I honestly believe 
> that the current state is more damaging that not having any (translated 
> FAQs) at all.

If you are suggesting that you remove well-maintained localized FAQs
together, then I against it. We should remove unmaintained localized
FAQs first IMO.

The discussion about English FAQ's state is completely another story,
though.
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan