Message-ID: <450D5EC0.4040802@commandprompt.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 07:42:08 -0700
From: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
Organization: Command Prompt, Inc.
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Magnus Hagander <mha@sollentuna.net>
CC: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
	Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>,
	Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, pgsql-www@postgresql.org,
	Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>, Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>,
	pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Developer's Wiki
References: <6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCEA0FBB7@algol.sollentuna.se>
In-Reply-To: <6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCEA0FBB7@algol.sollentuna.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> Two points I'm not clear about on this thread though:
>>
>> 1. Authorized user: is that someone with an account, or 
>> someone who has been authorized by someone else?
> 
> IIRC, the idea was "someone with an account". Basically you add a (very
> very small) hurdle so you only get the people who actually *care* to
> write things. But if you do care, it's not a lot of work. You also get
> traceability, so you can talk to whomever wrote a certain thing.
> 
> I don't see any gain in having someone specifically authorize who can
> write to it.

Yeah I would agree. My idea was just that people would actually create 
an account and be email confirmed.

Joshua D. Drake


> 
> //Magnus
> 
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
> 


-- 

    === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
    Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
              http://www.commandprompt.com/