X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (wm.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56D9B9FB227 for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2006 10:49:40 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 64219-05 for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2006 13:49:31 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from floppy.pyrenet.fr (floppy.pyrenet.fr [194.116.145.2]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF2859FB1EA for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2006 10:49:30 -0300 (ADT) Received: by floppy.pyrenet.fr (Postfix, from userid 106) id 88FCF30AF0; Mon, 18 Sep 2006 15:49:29 +0200 (MET DST) From: Lukas Kahwe Smith X-Newsgroups: pgsql.hackers Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] Developer's Wiki Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 15:49:29 +0200 Organization: Hub.Org Networking Services Lines: 27 Message-ID: <450EA3E9.9000009@pooteeweet.org> References: <200609161225.16961.josh@agliodbs.com> <877j03y50r.fsf@enterprisedb.com> <200609161309.50052.josh@agliodbs.com> <87slirwg7w.fsf@enterprisedb.com> <450C90A0.3090105@commandprompt.com> <15070.1158455724@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20060917100538.GA14893@svana.org> <23650.1158517516@sss.pgh.pa.us> <450DA0C7.5070308@dunslane.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.hub.org To: Andrew Dunstan User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (Windows/20060909) In-Reply-To: <450DA0C7.5070308@dunslane.net> To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests= X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200609/1498 X-Sequence-Number: 91026 Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Being slightly more abstract, we are grappling with a couple of > different kinds of objects here: discussions and decisions. The mailing > list is a very good way of having a discussion, and a wiki is IMNSHO a > poor substitute. Ditto, bulletin board, web forum, blog ..... The > reason is simply that with a mailing list all you need is a subscription > to get the info delivered to you in a medium everybody uses. It's push, > not pull, and that's very appealing. Any other mechanism requires the > user to seek the location of the discussion actively to some degree. > Conversely, the very unstructured nature of the mailing list(s) makes > them a poor medium for capturing decisions. That's why some of us have > advocated use of a tracker to capture decisions about development > directions, because the TODO list doesn't seem appropriate. But an open > wiki would be a horrible substitute for the TODO list - it would turn it > from a list that reflects at least some discussion and consensus into a > mere wish list of no authority whatsoever. IOW, it is the exact opposite > of the direction I believe we should be headed. I agree pretty much. However I disagree that a wiki is not useful to summarize discussion from the mailinglist. All that it needs is people that are humble and do not push their own agendas. If necessary they should discuss their summaries with members of both/all sides of a given discussion and with members of the core group. regards, Lukas