public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedWe need an Advocacy wiki
74+ messages / 14 participants
[nested] [flat]
* We need an Advocacy wiki
@ 2007-08-03 22:33 Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-03 22:41 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-03 23:04 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Marc G. Fournier <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 3 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Josh Berkus @ 2007-08-03 22:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-www
All,
We need to set up an Advocacy wiki with more liberal permissions. I've
been trying to use the developer wiki for that purpose, but it's just not
set up for people to add themselves so that they can do things like sign
up for shifts at a booth.
So we need a wiki which works the normal way; anyone registered can edit.
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-03 22:41 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Joshua D. Drake @ 2007-08-03 22:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: [email protected]; +Cc: pgsql-www
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Josh Berkus wrote:
> All,
>
> We need to set up an Advocacy wiki with more liberal permissions. I've
> been trying to use the developer wiki for that purpose, but it's just not
> set up for people to add themselves so that they can do things like sign
> up for shifts at a booth.
>
> So we need a wiki which works the normal way; anyone registered can edit.
Is it possible to create "open" pages with media wiki?
Joshua D. Drake
>
- --
=== 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/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGs679ATb/zqfZUUQRAuMDAKCPciCZFbseSp+arfktUUlhKTrLdQCfX/RM
0cus+bpYN/z4CqgZ2Eb3A2A=
=gWpp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-03 23:04 ` Marc G. Fournier <[email protected]>
2 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Marc G. Fournier @ 2007-08-03 23:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: [email protected]; pgsql-www
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I can setup wiki.postgresql.org as a seperate VPS with MediaWiki installed ...
or is there another wiki software you prefer? Who will 'moderate' this, or do
you plan on making it a totally open system, self-moderated?
- --On Friday, August 03, 2007 15:33:39 -0700 Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
wrote:
> All,
>
> We need to set up an Advocacy wiki with more liberal permissions. I've
> been trying to use the developer wiki for that purpose, but it's just not
> set up for people to add themselves so that they can do things like sign
> up for shifts at a booth.
>
> So we need a wiki which works the normal way; anyone registered can edit.
>
> --
> --Josh
>
> Josh Berkus
> PostgreSQL @ Sun
> San Francisco
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
- ----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email . [email protected] MSN . [email protected]
Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQFGs7SF4QvfyHIvDvMRAldzAJsG9Rw9sw/FjkkJmr5AWrO08ywo0ACghqbT
T/h3F4MZMKH5ZAzgCwXYqYk=
=5MIv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 13:56 ` Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:48 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Gregory Stark <[email protected]>
2 siblings, 2 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Greg Sabino Mullane @ 2007-08-04 13:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-www; +Cc: [email protected]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160
> We need to set up an Advocacy wiki with more liberal permissions. I've
> been trying to use the developer wiki for that purpose, but it's just not
> set up for people to add themselves so that they can do things like sign
> up for shifts at a booth.
I'm still not sure why we need two wikis - we are a transparent organization,
after all, and we have enough brains to separate the advocacy pages from the
development pages, with Categories if need be. We can also discuss changing
the wiki permission scheme, but opening it up to anyone is generally a bad idea
unless, like Wikipedia, you a) are willing to put up with vandalism and
general subtle mischief and b) have the critical mass of watchers to keep (a)
to a minimum. The experience of the interactive docs indicate that we do
not have that mass yet, and I am reluctant to go that route anyway for
public-facing pages that represent the project via a postgresql.org address.
> So we need a wiki which works the normal way; anyone registered can edit.
Not sure what your definition of normal is; that depends on what you mean by
"registered". If it means just creating an account via web form, that's
harldy an impediment to vandalism. We can certainly give more people the power
to grant write-access to wiki accounts, if that's the perceived hold up.
- --
Greg Sabino Mullane [email protected]
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200708040952
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iD8DBQFGtIVWvJuQZxSWSsgRA3UMAJ9oBfw9Poic/8LAgnbYg9/wvqloKgCgz1kk
6QDoA4w+zYfvrycIttwWLjc=
=MWMq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 14:20 ` Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Robert Treat @ 2007-08-04 14:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: [email protected]; +Cc: Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
On Saturday 04 August 2007 09:56, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
> but opening it up to anyone is
> generally a bad idea unless, like Wikipedia, you a) are willing to put up
> with vandalism and general subtle mischief and b) have the critical mass of
> watchers to keep (a) to a minimum. The experience of the interactive docs
> indicate that we do not have that mass yet,
What experience is this?
> and I am reluctant to go that
> route anyway for public-facing pages that represent the project via a
> postgresql.org address.
>
This is more likely the problem, ie. your personal feelings.
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 15:15 ` Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:24 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:44 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:56 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:47 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 4 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Dave Page @ 2007-08-04 15:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Treat <[email protected]>; +Cc: [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
Robert Treat wrote:
> On Saturday 04 August 2007 09:56, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
>> but opening it up to anyone is
>> generally a bad idea unless, like Wikipedia, you a) are willing to put up
>> with vandalism and general subtle mischief and b) have the critical mass of
>> watchers to keep (a) to a minimum. The experience of the interactive docs
>> indicate that we do not have that mass yet,
>
> What experience is this?
I imagine he's referring to the mountain of garbage that used to build
up until Magnus and I had a monster session moderating a few thousand
comments to get them back under control.
>> and I am reluctant to go that
>> route anyway for public-facing pages that represent the project via a
>> postgresql.org address.
I don't see any need to have any public facing pages on a Wiki - are we
too lazy to write things up for the website when we want to present them
to the world? It's not like it's difficult to do.
For collaboration work however, the Wiki is important I think - but I
agree with Greg, we shouldn't need a second one. Can't we have an area
on the current one with looser permissions?
/D
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 15:24 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:57 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-06 06:00 ` Re: [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Smith <[email protected]>
3 siblings, 2 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Magnus Hagander @ 2007-08-04 15:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Page <[email protected]>; +Cc: Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
Dave Page wrote:
>>> and I am reluctant to go that route anyway for public-facing pages
>>> that represent the project via a
>>> postgresql.org address.
>
> I don't see any need to have any public facing pages on a Wiki - are we
> too lazy to write things up for the website when we want to present them
> to the world? It's not like it's difficult to do.
>
> For collaboration work however, the Wiki is important I think - but I
> agree with Greg, we shouldn't need a second one. Can't we have an area
> on the current one with looser permissions?
Agreed. The whole idea behind a wiki is "reasonably loose permissions",
right? AS Greg already suggested, perhaps we just need a "better way"
for people to request permissions? (For example, right now it just says
"contact greg or neil", but it doesn't tell you how - not even an email
address...)
And a structure of the wiki that has a section for advocacy of course -
but we already have that.
/Magnus
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:24 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 16:57 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Joshua D. Drake @ 2007-08-04 16:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; +Cc: Dave Page <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
> Agreed. The whole idea behind a wiki is "reasonably loose permissions",
> right? AS Greg already suggested, perhaps we just need a "better way"
> for people to request permissions? (For example, right now it just says
> "contact greg or neil", but it doesn't tell you how - not even an email
> address...)
Or just have them email pgsql-www with the request and have more than
two people that can give the permissions?
Joshua D. Drake
- --
=== 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/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGtK/1ATb/zqfZUUQRAlbrAKCGx3yhw7H+GB0XbPS4RJMR9FzlYwCglTmR
SPFq07j8CEbuszzGlfe1kig=
=E7OR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:24 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-06 06:00 ` Greg Smith <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Greg Smith @ 2007-08-06 06:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ; +Cc: [email protected]
On Sat, 4 Aug 2007, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> AS Greg already suggested, perhaps we just need a "better way" for
> people to request permissions? (For example, right now it just says
> "contact greg or neil", but it doesn't tell you how - not even an email
> address...)
Fixed; there's now a new page at
http://developer.postgresql.org/index.php/Editing_Guidelines that explains
what to do (which our moderaters should look at now that I've made them
more public--I left the e-mail addresses somewhat obfuscated similarly to
the mailing lists). Like Greg Stark's story, this was a sore point for
me. The week I wanted to start editing I tried just e-mailing GSM for
approval, but it was during a time when he was unavailable. I waited a
few days while unsure if I'd even contacted him correctly, then e-mailed
Neil, then finally got in; had I not been really motivated I would have
just given up long before getting permissions.
Despite all that, I waste enough of my time cleaning up after spammers,
vandals, and idiots on other wikis that I'm still on the side of those
here suggesting this particular resources should stay controlled in this
fashion. Clearing up the instructions solves most of what bugged me.
What I'd suggest is turning those who can approve edit rights into a
mailing list (so the note on the new page I made can say "e-mail
[email protected]" or something instead of mentioning
multiple names) that forwards the request to everyone who has approval
permissions. Then expand that list a bit so that's it's more likely it
will hit someone who can do the approval in a timely fashion; first person
to grant the rights cc's the list and the requester saying it's done, and
barring the occasional harmless race condition dupe the whole thing would
be simple enough.
If Josh or others really need a true open wiki without such an approval
process, I'd suggest popping that into another database and create another
Wikimedia instance for it. I think having that all mixed in with the
content on the developer's wiki will just make tracking edits harder for
both groups. Having a "Recent changes" page that's small enough to browse
easily is helpful for the scale of people involved in these pages at this
point, and I do browse that section of the Developer's Wiki to see what's
been going on. I know I'd be bothered if that got filled with booth work
edits instead--and the booth workers would have an easier time policing
their area if the developer edits weren't in their way. Plus, if it gets
nailed hard you can just save the important stuff and nuke the whole
temporary wiki rather than be compelled do a time-intensive cleanup;
losing the history isn't as good of an idea for the developer's wiki.
--
* Greg Smith [email protected] http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 16:44 ` Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:59 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:23 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
3 siblings, 2 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Decibel! @ 2007-08-04 16:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Page <[email protected]>; +Cc: Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 04:15:24PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> For collaboration work however, the Wiki is important I think - but I
> agree with Greg, we shouldn't need a second one. Can't we have an area
> on the current one with looser permissions?
I think this is being blown way out of proportion.
We're not wikipedia. We have nowhere near the attention level, nor the
type of content that's likely to attract vandals. And before someone
brings up the doc comments, there hasn't appeared to be much of a flood
of garbage there since we instituted the login requirement.
It's also completely unfair to try and correlate keeping an open wiki
clean with doing the same for docs, because unlike docs we've got
hundreds of folks who could ensure that the wiki stays clean.
Can we please just give the public wiki a chance instead of coming up
with a bunch of reasons it won't work before we've even tried? It's not
like it's hard to change things later if needed.
(BTW, when I say public wiki I mean one where anyone with an account can
edit, not one where you don't need an account.)
--
Decibel!, aka Jim Nasby [email protected]
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:44 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 16:59 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:03 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:18 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 2 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Joshua D. Drake @ 2007-08-04 16:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Decibel! <[email protected]>; +Cc: Dave Page <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Decibel! wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 04:15:24PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> It's also completely unfair to try and correlate keeping an open wiki
> clean with doing the same for docs, because unlike docs we've got
> hundreds of folks who could ensure that the wiki stays clean.
Not to mention cleaning a wiki is as easy as "revert". The real problem
here is people that don't want to accept what is now common technology
not only for collaboration but also for public facing pages.
Joshua D. Drake
- --
=== 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/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGtLCFATb/zqfZUUQRAnttAKCipxFYp+iL/nLQYcZ/IFkKexAJ+wCfZmiP
yp7wMgrWX19A9IxKjdDaA+Q=
=iJg2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:44 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:59 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 17:03 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Joshua D. Drake @ 2007-08-04 17:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>; +Cc: Decibel! <[email protected]>; Dave Page <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Oh, and have a great weekend! :)
Joshua D. Drake
- --
=== 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/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGtLFMATb/zqfZUUQRAjWEAJ0YRfLXazHNXM9Hd13T6n89+8Gy9wCdHgjn
H0gcA8X3wxkx7HbBd14CavM=
=ccJa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:44 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:59 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 17:18 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 21:19 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Magnus Hagander @ 2007-08-04 17:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>; +Cc: Decibel! <[email protected]>; Dave Page <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Decibel! wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 04:15:24PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
>
>> It's also completely unfair to try and correlate keeping an open wiki
>> clean with doing the same for docs, because unlike docs we've got
>> hundreds of folks who could ensure that the wiki stays clean.
>
> Not to mention cleaning a wiki is as easy as "revert". The real problem
> here is people that don't want to accept what is now common technology
> not only for collaboration but also for public facing pages.
I certainly know it's turning into a common technology for that. The
unstructured nature of it has made it a *lot* harder to find anything on
the homepages of many of the projects that have switched to it. It also
in general makes it impossible to determine what information is official
and what is not.
//Magnus
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:44 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:59 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:18 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 21:19 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Joshua D. Drake @ 2007-08-04 21:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; +Cc: Decibel! <[email protected]>; Dave Page <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Decibel! wrote:
>>> On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 04:15:24PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
>>> It's also completely unfair to try and correlate keeping an open wiki
>>> clean with doing the same for docs, because unlike docs we've got
>>> hundreds of folks who could ensure that the wiki stays clean.
>> Not to mention cleaning a wiki is as easy as "revert". The real problem
>> here is people that don't want to accept what is now common technology
>> not only for collaboration but also for public facing pages.
>
> I certainly know it's turning into a common technology for that. The
> unstructured nature of it has made it a *lot* harder to find anything on
> the homepages of many of the projects that have switched to it. It also
> in general makes it impossible to determine what information is official
> and what is not.
Not when managed correctly. Keep in mind that I have zero problem with
requiring accounts for accessing the pages.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
>
>
> //Magnus
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
> choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
> match
>
- --
=== 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/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGtO1HATb/zqfZUUQRAi15AKCjUq4DzjJz57Pi6FJy3WhE6GOQWQCeN0+q
DiYLl2X8ueprNJWO+49g0rs=
=/4Oz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:44 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 17:23 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:28 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 08:11 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Tino Wildenhain <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 2 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Magnus Hagander @ 2007-08-04 17:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Decibel! <[email protected]>; +Cc: Dave Page <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
Decibel! wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 04:15:24PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
>> For collaboration work however, the Wiki is important I think - but I
>> agree with Greg, we shouldn't need a second one. Can't we have an area
>> on the current one with looser permissions?
>
> I think this is being blown way out of proportion.
>
> We're not wikipedia. We have nowhere near the attention level, nor the
> type of content that's likely to attract vandals. And before someone
> brings up the doc comments, there hasn't appeared to be much of a flood
> of garbage there since we instituted the login requirement.
Correct. There's still some, but it's much better now.
> It's also completely unfair to try and correlate keeping an open wiki
> clean with doing the same for docs, because unlike docs we've got
> hundreds of folks who could ensure that the wiki stays clean.
Not sure that's a fair count. Looking at the wiki user list there are
certainly 215 accounts. But by my untrained eye, a lot of those look
like automated users created by spam-bots in order to see if they can
create spam-pages. It could be that we have actual users named Zy9Yqd,
Yx9Qbh and Xj0Y6g, but I seriously doubt it. And that's a clear
indication that there are people (or rather, bots) probing the wiki
already trying to post crap.
> Can we please just give the public wiki a chance instead of coming up
> with a bunch of reasons it won't work before we've even tried? It's not
> like it's hard to change things later if needed.
>
> (BTW, when I say public wiki I mean one where anyone with an account can
> edit, not one where you don't need an account.)
As long as that holds, I'm absolutely up for giving it a try. Maybe part
of the disagreement has been from a misunderstanding of what a "public
wiki" is. In my book, a *public* wiki is one that doesn't need a
verified account. (I assume that you refer to verified account above. If
not, I don't agree until you add the word verified)
//Magnus
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:44 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:23 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 17:28 ` Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:39 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 08:13 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Tino Wildenhain <[email protected]>
2007-08-06 06:10 ` Re: [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Smith <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 3 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Decibel! @ 2007-08-04 17:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; +Cc: Dave Page <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 07:23:48PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Decibel! wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 04:15:24PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> >> For collaboration work however, the Wiki is important I think - but I
> >> agree with Greg, we shouldn't need a second one. Can't we have an area
> >> on the current one with looser permissions?
> >
> > I think this is being blown way out of proportion.
> >
> > We're not wikipedia. We have nowhere near the attention level, nor the
> > type of content that's likely to attract vandals. And before someone
> > brings up the doc comments, there hasn't appeared to be much of a flood
> > of garbage there since we instituted the login requirement.
>
> Correct. There's still some, but it's much better now.
>
>
> > It's also completely unfair to try and correlate keeping an open wiki
> > clean with doing the same for docs, because unlike docs we've got
> > hundreds of folks who could ensure that the wiki stays clean.
>
> Not sure that's a fair count. Looking at the wiki user list there are
> certainly 215 accounts. But by my untrained eye, a lot of those look
> like automated users created by spam-bots in order to see if they can
> create spam-pages. It could be that we have actual users named Zy9Yqd,
> Yx9Qbh and Xj0Y6g, but I seriously doubt it. And that's a clear
> indication that there are people (or rather, bots) probing the wiki
> already trying to post crap.
Well, my point is that if we allow our users to easily get accounts,
we'll have a lot of eyes on this...
> As long as that holds, I'm absolutely up for giving it a try. Maybe part
> of the disagreement has been from a misunderstanding of what a "public
> wiki" is. In my book, a *public* wiki is one that doesn't need a
> verified account. (I assume that you refer to verified account above. If
> not, I don't agree until you add the word verified)
Well, at the bare minimum we need a captcha or something similar.
Without that then yes, we're going to get all kinds of crap accounts.
Do we just have that turned off, or does mediawiki actually not support
that?
--
Decibel!, aka Jim Nasby [email protected]
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:44 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:23 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:28 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 17:39 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 18:18 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 21:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2 siblings, 2 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Magnus Hagander @ 2007-08-04 17:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Decibel! <[email protected]>; +Cc: Dave Page <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
Decibel! wrote:
>> As long as that holds, I'm absolutely up for giving it a try. Maybe part
>> of the disagreement has been from a misunderstanding of what a "public
>> wiki" is. In my book, a *public* wiki is one that doesn't need a
>> verified account. (I assume that you refer to verified account above. If
>> not, I don't agree until you add the word verified)
>
> Well, at the bare minimum we need a captcha or something similar.
> Without that then yes, we're going to get all kinds of crap accounts.
> Do we just have that turned off, or does mediawiki actually not support
> that?
I'd say we want email verification, so that we can contact the authors
when needed.
That said, I have no clue about mediawiki ;-)
//Magnus
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:44 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:23 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:28 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:39 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 18:18 ` Decibel! <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Decibel! @ 2007-08-04 18:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; +Cc: Dave Page <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 07:39:20PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Decibel! wrote:
> >> As long as that holds, I'm absolutely up for giving it a try. Maybe part
> >> of the disagreement has been from a misunderstanding of what a "public
> >> wiki" is. In my book, a *public* wiki is one that doesn't need a
> >> verified account. (I assume that you refer to verified account above. If
> >> not, I don't agree until you add the word verified)
> >
> > Well, at the bare minimum we need a captcha or something similar.
> > Without that then yes, we're going to get all kinds of crap accounts.
> > Do we just have that turned off, or does mediawiki actually not support
> > that?
>
> I'd say we want email verification, so that we can contact the authors
> when needed.
>
> That said, I have no clue about mediawiki ;-)
I have a suspicion that spammers are sophisticated enough to be able to
handle simple email verification... :/
--
Decibel!, aka Jim Nasby [email protected]
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:44 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:23 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:28 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:39 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 21:20 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Joshua D. Drake @ 2007-08-04 21:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; +Cc: Decibel! <[email protected]>; Dave Page <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Decibel! wrote:
>>> As long as that holds, I'm absolutely up for giving it a try. Maybe part
>>> of the disagreement has been from a misunderstanding of what a "public
>>> wiki" is. In my book, a *public* wiki is one that doesn't need a
>>> verified account. (I assume that you refer to verified account above. If
>>> not, I don't agree until you add the word verified)
>> Well, at the bare minimum we need a captcha or something similar.
>> Without that then yes, we're going to get all kinds of crap accounts.
>> Do we just have that turned off, or does mediawiki actually not support
>> that?
>
> I'd say we want email verification, so that we can contact the authors
> when needed.
Yes that is what I would expect.
Joshua D. Drake
>
> That said, I have no clue about mediawiki ;-)
>
> //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/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGtO2AATb/zqfZUUQRArHwAKCDmdtrqmpwlDhSgTZTDDT/pwfZHACfQNjO
9K6sAq40IWH7M0UHd1f/bXQ=
=I1ET
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:44 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:23 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:28 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-05 08:13 ` Tino Wildenhain <[email protected]>
2 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Tino Wildenhain @ 2007-08-05 08:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Decibel! <[email protected]>; +Cc: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; Dave Page <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
Decibel! schrieb:
...
> Well, at the bare minimum we need a captcha or something similar.
> Without that then yes, we're going to get all kinds of crap accounts.
> Do we just have that turned off, or does mediawiki actually not support
> that?
No Captcha please. These s*ck horribly and do not fight spambots
if they really want to get in. Please see my other mail on alternative
proposal.
Regards
Tino
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:44 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:23 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:28 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-06 06:10 ` Greg Smith <[email protected]>
2 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Greg Smith @ 2007-08-06 06:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: [email protected]
On Sat, 4 Aug 2007, Decibel! wrote:
> Well, at the bare minimum we need a captcha or something similar.
> Without that then yes, we're going to get all kinds of crap accounts.
> Do we just have that turned off, or does mediawiki actually not support
> that?
There are a couple of levels of captcha you can setup. For example, one
wiki I work on a regularly allows edits by any account as soon as it's
created. But if you add a reference to a URL that's outside of the Wiki
itself, committing that edit requires completing a captcha (where the data
you type is a combination of two common words appearing in the wiki).
This makes it so anyone can add regular content almost instantly, but
since the spammers can't automate linking to their sites it makes them
less likely to target you.
--
* Greg Smith [email protected] http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:44 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:23 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-05 08:11 ` Tino Wildenhain <[email protected]>
2007-08-07 18:43 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Tino Wildenhain @ 2007-08-05 08:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; +Cc: Decibel! <[email protected]>; Dave Page <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
Magnus Hagander schrieb:
...
> Not sure that's a fair count. Looking at the wiki user list there are
> certainly 215 accounts. But by my untrained eye, a lot of those look
> like automated users created by spam-bots in order to see if they can
> create spam-pages. It could be that we have actual users named Zy9Yqd,
> Yx9Qbh and Xj0Y6g, but I seriously doubt it. And that's a clear
> indication that there are people (or rather, bots) probing the wiki
> already trying to post crap.
>
>
>> Can we please just give the public wiki a chance instead of coming up
>> with a bunch of reasons it won't work before we've even tried? It's not
>> like it's hard to change things later if needed.
>>
>> (BTW, when I say public wiki I mean one where anyone with an account can
>> edit, not one where you don't need an account.)
>
> As long as that holds, I'm absolutely up for giving it a try. Maybe part
> of the disagreement has been from a misunderstanding of what a "public
> wiki" is. In my book, a *public* wiki is one that doesn't need a
> verified account. (I assume that you refer to verified account above. If
> not, I don't agree until you add the word verified)
Maybe the users could be created by referral or invitation? This way
you would form a little web of trust instead of having almost alien
people (or bots) trying to write something related to postgres.
Regards
Tino
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:44 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:23 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 08:11 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Tino Wildenhain <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-07 18:43 ` Decibel! <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Decibel! @ 2007-08-07 18:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tino Wildenhain <[email protected]>; +Cc: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; Dave Page <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
On Sun, Aug 05, 2007 at 10:11:50AM +0200, Tino Wildenhain wrote:
> Magnus Hagander schrieb:
> Maybe the users could be created by referral or invitation? This way
> you would form a little web of trust instead of having almost alien
> people (or bots) trying to write something related to postgres.
That's not really much better than what we've got right now... you're
still relying on a human somewhere to get things done, which adds a lot
of latency.
--
Decibel!, aka Jim Nasby [email protected]
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 16:56 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:16 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
3 siblings, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Joshua D. Drake @ 2007-08-04 16:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Page <[email protected]>; +Cc: Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Dave Page wrote:
> Robert Treat wrote:
>> On Saturday 04 August 2007 09:56, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
> I don't see any need to have any public facing pages on a Wiki - are we
> too lazy to write things up for the website when we want to present them
> to the world? It's not like it's difficult to do.
Yes, in fact it is. It is a complete pain in the butt in comparison to
editing a wiki. If I want a page added to the .Org I have to:
A. Understand CVS
B. Understand HTML
C. Understand patch
Worse, if I want to test my changes:
A. Understand apache
B. Understand mod_rewrite
C. Install and configure PHP
D. Figure out how everything is laid out in the htdocs structure for pgweb
Now, *I* understand all these things (except mod_rewrite). I *can*
contribute to the website and have.
*I* and nobody else in this community should have to go through that
much effort to add a page.
As a comparison for CMDs website:
(if the page exists)
A. Login
B. Edit page
C. Review changes
D. Save changes
(if the page doesn't exist)
A. Login
B. Insert new row into pages and site_items table
C. Edit page
D. Review changes
E. Save changes
The only time anyone has to do any type of coding is if we want a new
feature such as my blog.
Compare to a wiki:
A. Login
B. Make change
C. Review change
D. Save change
Now that I have written all of this. I am not suggesting that we change
our web infrastructure. I am however suggesting that we stop insulting
people and looking very arrogant about our, "It isn't like it is that
hard", because it is indeed hard and much harder than it should be.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
>
> For collaboration work however, the Wiki is important I think - but I
> agree with Greg, we shouldn't need a second one. Can't we have an area
> on the current one with looser permissions?
>
> /D
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
>
- --
=== 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/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGtK/AATb/zqfZUUQRAhllAJ9h+B5K2AWAmnHzCcmnh9j9QwgvjwCfcYqb
xBYMwCTHAhnrFgca8e06MKI=
=Oata
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:56 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 17:16 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 21:18 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Magnus Hagander @ 2007-08-04 17:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>; +Cc: Dave Page <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
>> Robert Treat wrote:
>>> On Saturday 04 August 2007 09:56, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
>> I don't see any need to have any public facing pages on a Wiki - are we
>> too lazy to write things up for the website when we want to present them
>> to the world? It's not like it's difficult to do.
>
> Yes, in fact it is. It is a complete pain in the butt in comparison to
> editing a wiki. If I want a page added to the .Org I have to:
Ever tried techdocs? ;-)
> A. Understand CVS
No, no need for that. You can just send your files to -www.
> B. Understand HTML
That, there is need for. Personally, I know a lot of people who find
that easier than some of the weird wiki markup thingies around :-P
I think the big problem for testing that is that our web *layout* (the
CSS and div-ifying) is very complex. I'd really love to see that
simplified - by someone who know it well enough.
But the truth is, most pages would be perfectly fine written just using
a couple of <h> and <p> tags, along with possibly a couple of <a
href>:s. As long as you don't need to muck about with complex layout
stuff, that's trivial. And AFAIK, you can't really muck around with said
complex layout stuff in wikis either, without hard-coding CSS and HTML
the same way.
> C. Understand patch
No need for that if you're adding a page. And not really needed if
you're changing one either, as one of the web guys can take care of that.
> Worse, if I want to test my changes:
There should be no need to test your changes unless you're writing
*code*. Which is not what we're talking about here, really.
> The only time anyone has to do any type of coding is if we want a new
> feature such as my blog.
Same goes for postgresql.org - as long as you're just putting in text,
there is no need for the majority of the points in your list.
> Now that I have written all of this. I am not suggesting that we change
> our web infrastructure. I am however suggesting that we stop insulting
> people and looking very arrogant about our, "It isn't like it is that
> hard", because it is indeed hard and much harder than it should be.
If it really is that hard (and I honestly don't believe that it is, but
I'm willing to accept that others find it that way), then we *should*
fix it. The hard part is agreeing on *how*, because there are so many
requirements...
> Oh, and have a great weekend! :)
You, too!
//Magnus
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:56 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:16 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 21:18 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Joshua D. Drake @ 2007-08-04 21:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; +Cc: Dave Page <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Dave Page wrote:
>> Yes, in fact it is. It is a complete pain in the butt in comparison to
>> editing a wiki. If I want a page added to the .Org I have to:
>
> Ever tried techdocs? ;-)
No. I don't like the layout (and yes that is an opinion thing and I
don't want to get into it).
>
>
>> A. Understand CVS
>
> No, no need for that. You can just send your files to -www.
You mean the straight HTML? what about everything that resides around it?
>> Now that I have written all of this. I am not suggesting that we change
>> our web infrastructure. I am however suggesting that we stop insulting
>> people and looking very arrogant about our, "It isn't like it is that
>> hard", because it is indeed hard and much harder than it should be.
>
> If it really is that hard (and I honestly don't believe that it is, but
> I'm willing to accept that others find it that way), then we *should*
> fix it. The hard part is agreeing on *how*, because there are so many
> requirements...
O.k. perhaps this is a perception problem. Consider my involvement in
the community and the fact that I thought that I had to do all of the
above in order to contribute to the site... Now take into account
someone who isn't as involved as I?
Where is the "Contributing to the PostgreSQL.Org website HOWTO"?
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
- --
=== 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/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGtO0KATb/zqfZUUQRAuG0AJ0f1QezCADg4S5tcTu5SahgLpPGnwCbBBIw
23g2sFOiNzIgV+HDMEiFN4g=
=yDl/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 17:47 ` Robert Treat <[email protected]>
3 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Robert Treat @ 2007-08-04 17:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Page <[email protected]>; +Cc: [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
On Saturday 04 August 2007 11:15, Dave Page wrote:
> Robert Treat wrote:
> > On Saturday 04 August 2007 09:56, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
> >> but opening it up to anyone is
> >> generally a bad idea unless, like Wikipedia, you a) are willing to put
> >> up with vandalism and general subtle mischief and b) have the critical
> >> mass of watchers to keep (a) to a minimum. The experience of the
> >> interactive docs indicate that we do not have that mass yet,
> >
> > What experience is this?
>
> I imagine he's referring to the mountain of garbage that used to build
> up until Magnus and I had a monster session moderating a few thousand
> comments to get them back under control.
>
*sigh*
Doesn't this suggest we do have mass to prevent vandalism/mischief ?
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 16:48 ` Gregory Stark <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:02 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:10 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:49 ` Re: [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki Lukas Kahwe Smith <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 3 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Gregory Stark @ 2007-08-04 16:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; +Cc: pgsql-www; [email protected]
"Greg Sabino Mullane" <[email protected]> writes:
> Not sure what your definition of normal is; that depends on what you mean by
> "registered". If it means just creating an account via web form, that's
> harldy an impediment to vandalism. We can certainly give more people the power
> to grant write-access to wiki accounts, if that's the perceived hold up.
Do we have any history of vandalism on the -hackers mailing list? There is no
approval mechanism for people subscribing to the list. Would people be happy
if every subscription to -hackers required someone to approve your membership?
I went to do update the wiki recently, found I didn't have write access and
gave up and went back to other things. I think any extra barriers are a bad
thing. It ought to be open until there's a demonstrable problem rather than
preemptively making it less useful because we anticipate problems we have no
evidence of.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:48 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Gregory Stark <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 17:02 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Joshua D. Drake @ 2007-08-04 17:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gregory Stark <[email protected]>; +Cc: Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www; [email protected]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Gregory Stark wrote:
> "Greg Sabino Mullane" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> I went to do update the wiki recently, found I didn't have write access and
> gave up and went back to other things. I think any extra barriers are a bad
> thing. It ought to be open until there's a demonstrable problem rather than
> preemptively making it less useful because we anticipate problems we have no
> evidence of.
>
Yep, which is why it wasn't until OSCON that I had a wiki account that I
actually paid attention to.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
>
- --
=== 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/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGtLEPATb/zqfZUUQRAjW1AKCVTzFCIWbAMFt5gDQ//5b/Zo4bawCgnjQW
8Bm9cJTDu7XL2ljvwZgqM/4=
=u6J4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:48 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Gregory Stark <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 17:10 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:21 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
2 siblings, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Magnus Hagander @ 2007-08-04 17:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gregory Stark <[email protected]>; +Cc: Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www; [email protected]
Gregory Stark wrote:
> "Greg Sabino Mullane" <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Not sure what your definition of normal is; that depends on what you mean by
>> "registered". If it means just creating an account via web form, that's
>> harldy an impediment to vandalism. We can certainly give more people the power
>> to grant write-access to wiki accounts, if that's the perceived hold up.
>
> Do we have any history of vandalism on the -hackers mailing list? There is no
> approval mechanism for people subscribing to the list. Would people be happy
> if every subscription to -hackers required someone to approve your membership?
No, but we *do* have a history of vandalism/spamming on the website.
This includes the interactive docs, news posts, event posts and
professional services. That's pretty much every single part of the
website that actually has a submit button, except for the bug reporting
form - which goes through the majordomo moderation system so it's still
moderated.
But - it helped significantly when we started requesting community
logins for these forms. It's still not gone - there are people
advertising for UK hotels and a few other things that actually sign up
for a community account with a temp email address and post from there.
This is the main reason why we still have manual verification on all
these things even though they require a login.
That said, allowing people to sign up for an account in an automated way
that does require email verification would work, as long as there is:
1) A way to revoke and ban addresses
2) Somebody to keep track of things, and remove spam and revoke/ban
these users.
(this would be the same level of verification that we have for the
mailinglists - it's not like they're unvalidated)
But the work required for (2) is a lot less than a completely open
system of course. If there are a couple of people who are willing to
take that upon them (which there seems to be, given the activity on the
wiki) we could always give that a try?
//Magnus
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:48 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Gregory Stark <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:10 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 17:21 ` Decibel! <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Decibel! @ 2007-08-04 17:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; +Cc: Gregory Stark <[email protected]>; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www; [email protected]
On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 07:10:07PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Gregory Stark wrote:
> > "Greg Sabino Mullane" <[email protected]> writes:
> But - it helped significantly when we started requesting community
> logins for these forms. It's still not gone - there are people
> advertising for UK hotels and a few other things that actually sign up
> for a community account with a temp email address and post from there.
> This is the main reason why we still have manual verification on all
> these things even though they require a login.
Actually, I rather doubt it's real, live people, because it's pretty
easy for a bot to spoof a form that doesn't have captcha or some other
means of verification.
In any case, any wiki should have that in place, so it's essentially a
non-issue.
--
Decibel!, aka Jim Nasby [email protected]
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Re: We need an Advocacy wiki Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:48 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Gregory Stark <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 17:49 ` Lukas Kahwe Smith <[email protected]>
2 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Lukas Kahwe Smith @ 2007-08-04 17:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gregory Stark <[email protected]>
Gregory Stark wrote:
> "Greg Sabino Mullane" <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Not sure what your definition of normal is; that depends on what you mean by
>> "registered". If it means just creating an account via web form, that's
>> harldy an impediment to vandalism. We can certainly give more people the power
>> to grant write-access to wiki accounts, if that's the perceived hold up.
>
> Do we have any history of vandalism on the -hackers mailing list? There is no
> approval mechanism for people subscribing to the list. Would people be happy
> if every subscription to -hackers required someone to approve your membership?
>
> I went to do update the wiki recently, found I didn't have write access and
> gave up and went back to other things. I think any extra barriers are a bad
> thing. It ought to be open until there's a demonstrable problem rather than
> preemptively making it less useful because we anticipate problems we have no
> evidence of.
Well we should definately require a login, even if its just so that we
can trace who made what changes so that we know who has taken
responsibility over a given section.
regards,
Lukas
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
@ 2007-08-04 17:13 Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:54 ` Re: [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki Lukas Kahwe Smith <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 21:14 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 2 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Dave Page @ 2007-08-04 17:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>; +Cc: Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
> ------- Original Message -------
> From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email protected]>
> To: Dave Page <[email protected]>
> Sent: 04/08/07, 17:56:32
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
>
> Yes, in fact it is. It is a complete pain in the butt in comparison to
> editing a wiki. If I want a page added to the .Org I have to:
>
> A. Understand CVS
> B. Understand HTML
> C. Understand patch
Rubbish. You send the text to -www.
Using a wiki for a public website looks completely unprofessional and gives the impression of a small organisation without the resources to do things properly.
Implemented in the manner being suggested leaves us with little editorial control over what is published. I'm not so much concerned with deliberate vandalism but with ensuring all published content is factually correct, non-libellous, and consistent with the projects aims and past decisions on what we should or shouldn't publish.
Regards, Dave
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 17:13 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 17:54 ` Lukas Kahwe Smith <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 18:00 ` Re: [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Lukas Kahwe Smith @ 2007-08-04 17:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Page <[email protected]>
Dave Page wrote:
> Using a wiki for a public website looks completely unprofessional and gives the impression of a small organisation without the resources to do things properly.
Honestly I dont think that our target audience cares much. What I do
feel is important is that we have some kind of editorial process to
ensure that there is no content on there, that the community at large
does not endorse or that is not labeled properly. This requires a group
of people subscribing to the changelog RSS feed and keeping an eye on
what goes in and warning this list if there is questionable content. It
also requires regular spring cleaning (I would say once per quarter).
regards,
Lukas
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 17:13 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:54 ` Re: [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki Lukas Kahwe Smith <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 18:00 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 18:04 ` Re: [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki Lukas Kahwe Smith <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Magnus Hagander @ 2007-08-04 18:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Lukas Kahwe Smith <[email protected]>; +Cc: Dave Page <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
>
>> Using a wiki for a public website looks completely unprofessional and
>> gives the impression of a small organisation without the resources to
>> do things properly.
>
> Honestly I dont think that our target audience cares much. What I do
Apparently we define our target audience a lot differently ;-) What
group does not notice an unprofessional web presence these days?
> feel is important is that we have some kind of editorial process to
> ensure that there is no content on there, that the community at large
> does not endorse or that is not labeled properly. This requires a group
> of people subscribing to the changelog RSS feed and keeping an eye on
> what goes in and warning this list if there is questionable content. It
> also requires regular spring cleaning (I would say once per quarter).
That method leaves it very possible for incorrect data to be up on the
main site for three months, which is IMHO unacceptable. I can accept
that for a community collaboration site (like the current wiki), but not
for the main web presence. "Moderation" has to happen before the fact
there. (that's a principle completely unrelated to if a wiki is used or
not - I assume there are wikis that can deal with that workflow as well)
/Magnus
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 17:13 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:54 ` Re: [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki Lukas Kahwe Smith <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 18:00 ` Re: [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 18:04 ` Lukas Kahwe Smith <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Lukas Kahwe Smith @ 2007-08-04 18:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; +Cc: Dave Page <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
>> Dave Page wrote:
>>
>>> Using a wiki for a public website looks completely unprofessional and
>>> gives the impression of a small organisation without the resources to
>>> do things properly.
>> Honestly I dont think that our target audience cares much. What I do
>
> Apparently we define our target audience a lot differently ;-) What
> group does not notice an unprofessional web presence these days?
Well my idea if an average PostgreSQL user is not one who would be
turned off by the idea of a wiki in general. I also do not think that a
wiki is unprofessional by definition.
> That method leaves it very possible for incorrect data to be up on the
> main site for three months, which is IMHO unacceptable. I can accept
> that for a community collaboration site (like the current wiki), but not
> for the main web presence. "Moderation" has to happen before the fact
> there. (that's a principle completely unrelated to if a wiki is used or
> not - I assume there are wikis that can deal with that workflow as well)
Oh maybe I missed something here, but I did not realize that we are
discussing replacing the main site with a wiki. I just think that the
wiki is perfect when we want to involve a broad audience in the creation
of the text (which may very well then we moved to techdoc or the
documentation later on) or when its just for a quick one shot with a
life time if a few weeks (months tops).
regards,
Lukas
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 17:13 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 21:14 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 21:18 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Joshua D. Drake @ 2007-08-04 21:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Page <[email protected]>; +Cc: Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Dave Page wrote:
>> A. Understand CVS
>> B. Understand HTML
>> C. Understand patch
>
> Rubbish. You send the text to -www.
>
Really? O.k. I need a page where I and Berkus can dynamically manage
sponsors. Where do I send the requirements to get that done?
> Using a wiki for a public website looks completely unprofessional and gives the impression of a small organisation without the resources to do things properly.
Cough.. hardly. The tool is not what makes it unprofessional, it is the
presentation.
>
> Implemented in the manner being suggested leaves us with little editorial control over what is published. I'm not so much concerned with deliberate vandalism but with ensuring all published content is factually correct, non-libellous, and consistent with the projects aims and past decisions on what we should or shouldn't publish.
>
I *repeat* I am not suggesting we change our web infrastructure, only
that the attitudes around it change a bit.
Joshua D. Drake
> Regards, Dave
>
- --
=== 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/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGtOwdATb/zqfZUUQRAuWGAJ9Bfrpq6Hsim2mwYvFwMKjDJR5uEQCgoNFy
uHs86YTURNUB5DUJ+KZjVOU=
=m7bw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 17:13 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 21:14 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 21:18 ` Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 23:59 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Robert Treat @ 2007-08-04 21:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>; +Cc: Dave Page <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
On Saturday 04 August 2007 17:14, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
> >> A. Understand CVS
> >> B. Understand HTML
> >> C. Understand patch
> >
> > Rubbish. You send the text to -www.
>
> Really? O.k. I need a page where I and Berkus can dynamically manage
> sponsors. Where do I send the requirements to get that done?
>
He said send the text of the page, you start talking about dynamic management
and requirements... you're letting your pointy-hair colors show! :-D
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 17:13 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 21:14 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 21:18 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 23:59 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Joshua D. Drake @ 2007-08-04 23:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Treat <[email protected]>; +Cc: Dave Page <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Robert Treat wrote:
> On Saturday 04 August 2007 17:14, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Dave Page wrote:
>>>> A. Understand CVS
>>>> B. Understand HTML
>>>> C. Understand patch
>>> Rubbish. You send the text to -www.
>> Really? O.k. I need a page where I and Berkus can dynamically manage
>> sponsors. Where do I send the requirements to get that done?
>>
>
> He said send the text of the page, you start talking about dynamic management
> and requirements... you're letting your pointy-hair colors show! :-D
Shhhhh ;).
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
>
- --
=== 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/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGtRLVATb/zqfZUUQRAqR5AKCcr+pUR8R7i8+BtC6I/197upBnvQCfZrE6
zL6XsirHp43Vi6oJRFN6d4I=
=F/gG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
@ 2007-08-04 17:50 Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 18:17 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Neil Conway <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 18:21 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 2 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Dave Page @ 2007-08-04 17:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Decibel! <[email protected]>; +Cc: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
> ------- Original Message -------
> From: Decibel! <[email protected]>
> To: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
> Sent: 04/08/07, 18:28:33
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
>
> Well, at the bare minimum we need a captcha or something similar.
There are disability discrimination issues with all the captcha type systems we've looked at in the past, but we're open to suggestions.
/D
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 17:50 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 18:17 ` Neil Conway <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Neil Conway @ 2007-08-04 18:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Page <[email protected]>; +Cc: Decibel! <[email protected]>; Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
On Sat, 2007-04-08 at 18:50 +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> There are disability discrimination issues with all the captcha type
> systems we've looked at in the past, but we're open to suggestions.
What "discrimination issues" are you referring to?
Given the multitude of captcha-like systems, I doubt our requirements
are so unique that we can't find something that does what we need.
-Neil
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 17:50 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 18:21 ` Decibel! <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Decibel! @ 2007-08-04 18:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Page <[email protected]>; +Cc: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 06:50:30PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> > Well, at the bare minimum we need a captcha or something similar.
>
> There are disability discrimination issues with all the captcha type systems we've looked at in the past, but we're open to suggestions.
Yeah, I think the logical way to go is the ones that ask a question
that's hard for a computer to answer; though I know there's also captcha
systems that let you listen to someone speaking the captcha.
--
Decibel!, aka Jim Nasby [email protected]
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
@ 2007-08-04 17:55 Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 20:19 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Dave Page @ 2007-08-04 17:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Treat <[email protected]>; +Cc: [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
> ------- Original Message -------
> From: Robert Treat <[email protected]>
> To: Dave Page <[email protected]>
> Sent: 04/08/07, 18:47:17
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
>
> > I imagine he's referring to the mountain of garbage that used to build
> > up until Magnus and I had a monster session moderating a few thousand
> > comments to get them back under control.
> >
>
> *sigh*
>
> Doesn't this suggest we do have mass to prevent vandalism/mischief ?
It means we knuckled down and cleaned up a mess that other volunteers left behind, not that we want more to look after.
/D
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 17:55 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 20:19 ` Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 20:31 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Robert Treat @ 2007-08-04 20:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Page <[email protected]>; +Cc: [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
On Saturday 04 August 2007 13:55, Dave Page wrote:
> > ------- Original Message -------
> > From: Robert Treat <[email protected]>
> > To: Dave Page <[email protected]>
> > Sent: 04/08/07, 18:47:17
> > Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
> >
> > > I imagine he's referring to the mountain of garbage that used to build
> > > up until Magnus and I had a monster session moderating a few thousand
> > > comments to get them back under control.
> >
> > *sigh*
> >
> > Doesn't this suggest we do have mass to prevent vandalism/mischief ?
>
> It means we knuckled down and cleaned up a mess that other volunteers left
> behind, not that we want more to look after.
>
Geez Dave, you seem awefully bitter about this (And given I've cleaned up
plenty of spam/junk in our website, sometimes 100+ at a time, and it
generally involves nothing more than a few sql commands, I'm not sure why)
But in any case, none of that stuff propogated out to the main website, which
was the whole point of this; keeping vandalism/mischief out of public view. I
think were capable of accomplishing that (though I guess you think it we're
much closer to the edge...)
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 17:55 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 20:19 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Robert Treat <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 20:31 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Magnus Hagander @ 2007-08-04 20:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Treat <[email protected]>; +Cc: Dave Page <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
Robert Treat wrote:
>>>> I imagine he's referring to the mountain of garbage that used to build
>>>> up until Magnus and I had a monster session moderating a few thousand
>>>> comments to get them back under control.
>>> *sigh*
>>>
>>> Doesn't this suggest we do have mass to prevent vandalism/mischief ?
>> It means we knuckled down and cleaned up a mess that other volunteers left
>> behind, not that we want more to look after.
>>
>
> Geez Dave, you seem awefully bitter about this (And given I've cleaned up
> plenty of spam/junk in our website, sometimes 100+ at a time, and it
> generally involves nothing more than a few sql commands, I'm not sure why)
>
> But in any case, none of that stuff propogated out to the main website, which
> was the whole point of this; keeping vandalism/mischief out of public view. I
> think were capable of accomplishing that (though I guess you think it we're
> much closer to the edge...)
Actually, it did propagate out to the main website, because this was
back when the comment moderation was done after it was already
published. (or rather - the comments were added at that time, but the
cleanup was done after it was changed). The change to pre-moderation
made a lot of difference, and without it the cleanup wouldn't really
have been worthwhile.
//Magnus
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
@ 2007-08-04 18:30 Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 18:59 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Neil Conway <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Dave Page @ 2007-08-04 18:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Neil Conway <[email protected]>; +Cc: Decibel! <[email protected]>; Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
> ------- Original Message -------
> From: Neil Conway <[email protected]>
> To: Dave Page <[email protected]>
> Sent: 04/08/07, 19:17:59
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
>
> On Sat, 2007-04-08 at 18:50 +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> > There are disability discrimination issues with all the captcha type
> > systems we've looked at in the past, but we're open to suggestions.
>
> What "discrimination issues" are you referring to?
Screenreaders cannot read the images.
> Given the multitude of captcha-like systems, I doubt our requirements
> are so unique that we can't find something that does what we need.
Many of the bigger sites (eg. Paypal) offer audio versions of the images, but these we're beyond our resources last time we investigated.
The reason I'm concerned about this is that we now have SPI acting as a legal entity for our funds etc, meaning there's something to be prosecuted for non-compliance with legislation. This has already happened in at least one case when a US based training firm were taken to court in the UK for failing to comply with the Disability Discrimination Act.
Regards, Dave
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 18:30 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 18:59 ` Neil Conway <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Neil Conway @ 2007-08-04 18:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Page <[email protected]>; +Cc: Decibel! <[email protected]>; Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
On Sat, 2007-04-08 at 19:30 +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> Screenreaders cannot read the images.
Since the goal is to simplify signups in the common case, can't we just
provide a means for people to email the admins and have an account
created if they can't use the captcha?
> Many of the bigger sites (eg. Paypal) offer audio versions of the images
To play the devil's advocate, ISTM this still discriminates against the
deaf-blind.
-Neil
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
@ 2007-08-04 19:32 Dave Page <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Dave Page @ 2007-08-04 19:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Neil Conway <[email protected]>; +Cc: Decibel! <[email protected]>; Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
> ------- Original Message -------
> From: Neil Conway <[email protected]>
> To: Dave Page <[email protected]>
> Sent: 04/08/07, 19:59:29
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
>
> On Sat, 2007-04-08 at 19:30 +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> > Screenreaders cannot read the images.
>
> Since the goal is to simplify signups in the common case, can't we just
> provide a means for people to email the admins and have an account
> created if they can't use the captcha?
We could do that, though there is a weaker argument that it would still be discriminatory because the disabled used cannot participate instantly, or without drawing attention to his or her disability.
One trend in UK anti-discrimination laws of late is that the question of whether or not discrimination has or has not occurred is almost entirely down to the victim - ie. if *they* feel they have been discriminated against, there is a case to be heard (though not necessarily to be won of course).
> > Many of the bigger sites (eg. Paypal) offer audio versions of the images
>
> To play the devil's advocate, ISTM this still discriminates against the
> deaf-blind.
You have to draw the line somewhere about how far it is reasonable to take these things. Ever heard (better yet, seen the video) Metallica's 'One'? Would it be reasonable to make the site accessible for that poor guy?
Regards, Dave
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
@ 2007-08-04 21:08 Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-07 18:41 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Dave Page @ 2007-08-04 21:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Treat <[email protected]>; +Cc: [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
> ------- Original Message -------
> From: Robert Treat <[email protected]>
> To: "Dave Page" <[email protected]>
> Sent: 04/08/07, 21:19:54
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
>
> Geez Dave, you seem awefully bitter about this
Not at all.
> (And given I've cleaned up
> plenty of spam/junk in our website, sometimes 100+ at a time, and it
> generally involves nothing more than a few sql commands, I'm not sure why)
If it's from the same batch, then yes, you can often do this.
> But in any case, none of that stuff propogated out to the main website, which
> was the whole point of this; keeping vandalism/mischief out of public view.
See Magnus' comment... Not that I think that's the point.
> I
> think were capable of accomplishing that (though I guess you think it we're
> much closer to the edge...)
All too often new volunteers fail to keep interest. Virtually all website moderation is done by the same 4 or so people, all of whom are very longterm contributors and have been doing it for years.
I for one don't mind doing the moderation work, but I 'm wary of new ideas which may eventually become part of that work if the initial folks lose interest. I don't think that's unreasonable.
/D
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 21:08 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-07 18:41 ` Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-07 18:49 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Decibel! @ 2007-08-07 18:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Page <[email protected]>; +Cc: Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 10:08:37PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> All too often new volunteers fail to keep interest. Virtually all website moderation is done by the same 4 or so people, all of whom are very longterm contributors and have been doing it for years.
>
> I for one don't mind doing the moderation work, but I 'm wary of new ideas which may eventually become part of that work if the initial folks lose interest. I don't think that's unreasonable.
AFAIK we've never really asked for people to help moderate the site.
It's also not published anyplace where you'd go if you did want to help
moderate. Finally, if my experience of trying to become a moderator on
-general[1] is any indication, our signup process for new moderators is
completely broken anyway.
[1]: I was supposedly setup to be a moderator, but I never got any info
on how to do it, nor have I seen any emails that need moderating. IIRC
I've posted about this at least once on -www and got no response. I'd be
happy to help with this stuff as time permits, but I'm not going to go
on a quest to get it setup.
--
Decibel!, aka Jim Nasby [email protected]
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 21:08 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-07 18:41 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-07 18:49 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-07 19:04 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-07 21:54 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 2 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Magnus Hagander @ 2007-08-07 18:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Decibel! <[email protected]>; +Cc: Dave Page <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
Decibel! wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 10:08:37PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
>> All too often new volunteers fail to keep interest. Virtually all website moderation is done by the same 4 or so people, all of whom are very longterm contributors and have been doing it for years.
>>
>> I for one don't mind doing the moderation work, but I 'm wary of new ideas which may eventually become part of that work if the initial folks lose interest. I don't think that's unreasonable.
>
> AFAIK we've never really asked for people to help moderate the site.
> It's also not published anyplace where you'd go if you did want to help
> moderate. Finally, if my experience of trying to become a moderator on
> -general[1] is any indication, our signup process for new moderators is
> completely broken anyway.
site != mailinglists. You want to help moderate the site, just post to
-www (which would be the normal thing to do it you had a question about
-www :-P).
But AFAIK you're correct in that we haven't explicitly asked for more
moderators. The need is generally smaller than the lists, but if you're
interested let us now ;-)
//Magnus
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 21:08 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-07 18:41 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-07 18:49 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-07 19:04 ` Dave Page <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Dave Page @ 2007-08-07 19:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; +Cc: Decibel! <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> But AFAIK you're correct in that we haven't explicitly asked for more
> moderators. The need is generally smaller than the lists, but if you're
> interested let us now ;-)
Yeah, it seems to come in spurts on the website - I think partly when
the spammers decide to spend a week or so trying to persuade us to turn
off the moderation in frustration.
It's been pretty quiet the last couple of weeks.
Regards, Dave.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 21:08 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-07 18:41 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-07 18:49 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-07 21:54 ` Decibel! <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Decibel! @ 2007-08-07 21:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; +Cc: Dave Page <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 08:49:33PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > AFAIK we've never really asked for people to help moderate the site.
> > It's also not published anyplace where you'd go if you did want to help
> > moderate. Finally, if my experience of trying to become a moderator on
> > -general[1] is any indication, our signup process for new moderators is
> > completely broken anyway.
>
> site != mailinglists. You want to help moderate the site, just post to
> -www (which would be the normal thing to do it you had a question about
> -www :-P).
>
> But AFAIK you're correct in that we haven't explicitly asked for more
> moderators. The need is generally smaller than the lists, but if you're
> interested let us now ;-)
I'd be happy to help; someone just set me up and point me at the
guidelines we're using.
--
Decibel!, aka Jim Nasby [email protected]
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
@ 2007-08-04 21:59 Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 23:54 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Dave Page @ 2007-08-04 21:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>; +Cc: Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
> ------- Original Message -------
> From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email protected]>
> To: Dave Page <[email protected]>
> Sent: 04/08/07, 22:14:05
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Dave Page wrote:
>
> >> A. Understand CVS
> >> B. Understand HTML
> >> C. Understand patch
> >
> > Rubbish. You send the text to -www.
> >
>
> Really? O.k. I need a page where I and Berkus can dynamically manage
> sponsors. Where do I send the requirements to get that done?
>
You don't 'manage' sponsors on the website, if only because much of the detail on any givesponsor should be confidential. If you want to list them, forward the details and one of us will update the sponsors page.
/D
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 21:59 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 23:54 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 09:19 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Joshua D. Drake @ 2007-08-04 23:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Page <[email protected]>; +Cc: Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Dave Page wrote:
>
>>>> A. Understand CVS
>>>> B. Understand HTML
>>>> C. Understand patch
>>> Rubbish. You send the text to -www.
>>>
>> Really? O.k. I need a page where I and Berkus can dynamically manage
>> sponsors. Where do I send the requirements to get that done?
>>
>
> You don't 'manage' sponsors on the website, if only because much of the detail on any givesponsor should be confidential. If you want to list them, forward the details and one of us will update the sponsors page.
And you think, that I don't recognize the *exact* level of what needs to
be confidential or that by chance I would not communicate in discrete
and finite detail of what a potential or existing sponsor would wish to
be known?
We do indeed need sponsor management, I can either do it the hard way,
which is to draw up a new page every time or I can do it the easy way in
which to have a dynamic interface that is easy to manage.
The hard way, is exactly why we have neglected our partners (sponsors)
to date, because of time, and resources. It is also the exact same
reason that Berkus has *also* not provided a new sponsors page.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
>
> /D
>
- --
=== 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/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGtRC+ATb/zqfZUUQRAi3KAJ9+gYj9D+ZQK6LCfUxJzubHYOdr1wCgp3Td
pQQFzsO3ap/z+By8dByHkKg=
=TEfa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 21:59 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 23:54 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-05 09:19 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 15:05 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 18:16 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 2 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Magnus Hagander @ 2007-08-05 09:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>; +Cc: Dave Page <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
>>> Really? O.k. I need a page where I and Berkus can dynamically manage
>>> sponsors. Where do I send the requirements to get that done?
>>>
>> You don't 'manage' sponsors on the website, if only because much of the detail on any givesponsor should be confidential. If you want to list them, forward the details and one of us will update the sponsors page.
>
> And you think, that I don't recognize the *exact* level of what needs to
> be confidential or that by chance I would not communicate in discrete
> and finite detail of what a potential or existing sponsor would wish to
> be known?
>
> We do indeed need sponsor management, I can either do it the hard way,
> which is to draw up a new page every time or I can do it the easy way in
> which to have a dynamic interface that is easy to manage.
>
> The hard way, is exactly why we have neglected our partners (sponsors)
> to date, because of time, and resources. It is also the exact same
> reason that Berkus has *also* not provided a new sponsors page.
Ok. I have to admit I don't follow you - what exactly is your need? To
be able to dynamically handle *public* information about sponsors, or to
be bale to handle *confidential* information about them?
If you're talking about the public stuff, then spec up exactly what you
need and post it to -www. Or even better, have one of your php guys
write a patch ;-) But I can't imagine it shouldn't be insanely
difficult, so probably someone else can do it for you.
If you're talking about private stuff, why do you want it on the main
website? I'm (as you will know to the point of sickness by now) all for
a single unified web presence *to the end users*. But this kind of
confidential information that really only a few people should have
access to (and not even the whole "dev community = anybody signed up on
-hackers" like the wiki) can live elsewhere. Like we've done with pmt.
So if that's what's needed, I'd suggest either using pmt or setting up
something similar to pmt - depending on exactly who should have access
to the information.
You can't very well stick this confidential information on a wiki
either, as long as it's open for public reader, can you?
So my summary is:
* Information directed at end users and "outsiders" - website
* Information directed only at the active community - wiki
* Confidential information requiring login for both read and write -
separate completely
//Magnus
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 21:59 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 23:54 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 09:19 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-05 15:05 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 15:29 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Joshua D. Drake @ 2007-08-05 15:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; +Cc: Dave Page <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Dave Page wrote:
>> The hard way, is exactly why we have neglected our partners (sponsors)
>> to date, because of time, and resources. It is also the exact same
>> reason that Berkus has *also* not provided a new sponsors page.
>
> Ok. I have to admit I don't follow you - what exactly is your need? To
> be able to dynamically handle *public* information about sponsors, or to
> be bale to handle *confidential* information about them?
Let's take this to another thread. After arguing with dpage about this I
realize we might be talking past each other.
>
> If you're talking about the public stuff, then spec up exactly what you
> need and post it to -www. Or even better, have one of your php guys
> write a patch ;-) But I can't imagine it shouldn't be insanely
> difficult, so probably someone else can do it for you.
>
- --
=== 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/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGtec8ATb/zqfZUUQRAtniAJ9oeXnxfzo2xPKS3NovZ8hcl1+ohgCgqecV
8nsSZ/Uwgmes8gwLEG4zh3g=
=y0ib
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 21:59 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 23:54 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 09:19 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 15:05 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-05 15:29 ` Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 15:35 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Dave Page @ 2007-08-05 15:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>; +Cc: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>> Dave Page wrote:
>
>>> The hard way, is exactly why we have neglected our partners (sponsors)
>>> to date, because of time, and resources. It is also the exact same
>>> reason that Berkus has *also* not provided a new sponsors page.
>> Ok. I have to admit I don't follow you - what exactly is your need? To
>> be able to dynamically handle *public* information about sponsors, or to
>> be bale to handle *confidential* information about them?
>
> Let's take this to another thread. After arguing with dpage about this I
> realize we might be talking past each other.
Wouldn't be the first time, and I doubt it'll be the last. :-)
/D
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 21:59 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 23:54 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 09:19 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 15:05 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 15:29 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-05 15:35 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Joshua D. Drake @ 2007-08-05 15:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Page <[email protected]>; +Cc: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Dave Page wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>>> Dave Page wrote:
>>>> The hard way, is exactly why we have neglected our partners (sponsors)
>>>> to date, because of time, and resources. It is also the exact same
>>>> reason that Berkus has *also* not provided a new sponsors page.
>>> Ok. I have to admit I don't follow you - what exactly is your need? To
>>> be able to dynamically handle *public* information about sponsors, or to
>>> be bale to handle *confidential* information about them?
>> Let's take this to another thread. After arguing with dpage about this I
>> realize we might be talking past each other.
>
> Wouldn't be the first time, and I doubt it'll be the last. :-)
We could pray and hope but then reality would crush us ;)
Joshua D. Drake
>
> /D
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>
- --
=== 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/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGte5eATb/zqfZUUQRAqTfAJ9+gDQj/J3jh3R/FXXxzDuprxK5VgCffFKI
sR9ovXTDboLnUDDYY29L+T4=
=epWC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 21:59 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 23:54 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 09:19 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-05 18:16 ` Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 22:14 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Josh Berkus @ 2007-08-05 18:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-www; +Cc: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>; Dave Page <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
Josh,
> > We do indeed need sponsor management, I can either do it the hard way,
> > which is to draw up a new page every time or I can do it the easy way in
> > which to have a dynamic interface that is easy to manage.
Be fair. The website formatting is NOT what's holding up our ability to have
a sponsor page. Having up-to-date sponsor data (my fault) and a script to
generate sponsor listings (your fault) is. The XHTML for the page is quite
simple, the only moderately complex part is uploading sponsor logo images.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 21:59 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 23:54 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 09:19 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 18:16 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-05 22:14 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Joshua D. Drake @ 2007-08-05 22:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Josh Berkus <[email protected]>; +Cc: pgsql-www; Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; Dave Page <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Josh,
>
>>> We do indeed need sponsor management, I can either do it the hard way,
>>> which is to draw up a new page every time or I can do it the easy way in
>>> which to have a dynamic interface that is easy to manage.
>
> Be fair. The website formatting is NOT what's holding up our ability to have
> a sponsor page. Having up-to-date sponsor data (my fault) and a script to
> generate sponsor listings (your fault) is. The XHTML for the page is quite
> simple, the only moderately complex part is uploading sponsor logo images.
Josh I am being fair, the point was, we need sponsor management. We
don't have that right now. If you read the *entire* thread you will see
where it all came from.
I have already discussed with Magnus the technological requirements and
we are both in agreement that it won't be difficult at all to get up in
a manner that is dynamically manageable.
Joshua D. Drake
- --
=== 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/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGtkW/ATb/zqfZUUQRAnCyAJ4m+fOMjHsUmOsJCwk0UbL/4ga1WACgrgpV
Qer8oZlLFr+cqxjEAHzKjlM=
=jg9Q
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
@ 2007-08-04 22:06 Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 23:58 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Dave Page @ 2007-08-04 22:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>; +Cc: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
> ------- Original Message -------
> From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email protected]>
> To: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
> Sent: 04/08/07, 22:18:02
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
>
> O.k. perhaps this is a perception problem. Consider my involvement in
> the community and the fact that I thought that I had to do all of the
> above in order to contribute to the site... Now take into account
> someone who isn't as involved as I?
People from all sorts of places mail their requests to webmaster@ from where they are actioned or pointed in the right direction.
This is fairly standard practice the world over, and works quite well - I even do it internally in EDB. In your case, I would expect you to mail the webteam (-www). I don't understand why this is difficult for you.
/D
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 22:06 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-04 23:58 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 00:41 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Joshua D. Drake @ 2007-08-04 23:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Page <[email protected]>; +Cc: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Dave Page wrote:
>
>> ------- Original Message -------
>> From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email protected]>
>> To: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
>> Sent: 04/08/07, 22:18:02
>> Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
>>
>> O.k. perhaps this is a perception problem. Consider my involvement in
>> the community and the fact that I thought that I had to do all of the
>> above in order to contribute to the site... Now take into account
>> someone who isn't as involved as I?
>
> People from all sorts of places mail their requests to webmaster@ from where they are actioned or pointed in the right direction.
>
> This is fairly standard practice the world over, and works quite well - I even do it internally in EDB. In your case, I would expect you to mail the webteam (-www). I don't understand why this is difficult for you.
It isn't difficult, it is unexpected. You don't manage content via
webmaster@, that is stupid. We are not talking about one off edits for a
spelling mistake here. Now I would concur that -www would make
reasonable sense, but my point, was that we might have a perception
problem. I was trying to be helpful and I repeat:
Where is the, "How to contribute to the PostgreSQL.Org website HOWTO?".
If it doesn't exist, does it by chance make sense to have one? If not,
why not? It isn't like this is the first time people have brought up the
point that it isn't as easy as it could be to contribute to the website.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
- --
=== 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/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGtRKbATb/zqfZUUQRAulAAJ9bzG5EFbvTm0IpnXeAZovcJNvqoQCghECM
Ynli5N1yLYO62klD5xajkAs=
=HGpm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 22:06 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 23:58 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-05 00:41 ` Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 00:46 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Josh Berkus @ 2007-08-05 00:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: [email protected]; +Cc: pgsql-www
All,
> It isn't difficult, it is unexpected. You don't manage content via
> webmaster@, that is stupid...
Guys, this is all very entertaining but isn't getting me any closer to having
a restriction-free wiki for booth/activity signups, and seems to have gone
pretty far afield of a simple request that should have taken less long to
fulfill than it has been to discuss. We really shouldn't have to get into a
discussion of overhauling the infrastructure for that ...
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 22:06 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 23:58 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 00:41 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-05 00:46 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 01:43 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Joshua D. Drake @ 2007-08-05 00:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Josh Berkus <[email protected]>; +Cc: [email protected]; pgsql-www
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Josh Berkus wrote:
> All,
>
>> It isn't difficult, it is unexpected. You don't manage content via
>> webmaster@, that is stupid...
>
> Guys, this is all very entertaining but isn't getting me any closer to having
> a restriction-free wiki for booth/activity signups, and seems to have gone
> pretty far afield of a simple request that should have taken less long to
> fulfill than it has been to discuss. We really shouldn't have to get into a
> discussion of overhauling the infrastructure for that ...
Agreed.
Open up the wiki to signups with email confirmation. Give half a dozen
people we trust access to manage users and rollback content.
Call it good.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
>
- --
=== 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/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGtR39ATb/zqfZUUQRAiqNAJ4izKSqbi9++XIq1zzKfdS6kYpyTQCeNMqN
0MqDyvH/INn0njfrhg8urM0=
=gzl3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 22:06 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 23:58 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 00:41 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 00:46 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-05 01:43 ` Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-06 21:56 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Selena Deckelmann <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Josh Berkus @ 2007-08-05 01:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: [email protected]; +Cc: pgsql-www
Josh, All:
> Open up the wiki to signups with email confirmation. Give half a dozen
> people we trust access to manage users and rollback content.
Either that or set up a 2nd, permissive, wiki. I don't care, I can work it
either way.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-04 22:06 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 23:58 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 00:41 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 00:46 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 01:43 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-06 21:56 ` Selena Deckelmann <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Selena Deckelmann @ 2007-08-06 21:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Josh Berkus <[email protected]>; PostgreSQL Advocacy List <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
On Aug 4, 2007, at 6:43 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Josh, All:
>
>> Open up the wiki to signups with email confirmation. Give half a
>> dozen
>> people we trust access to manage users and rollback content.
>
> Either that or set up a 2nd, permissive, wiki. I don't care, I can
> work it
> either way.
The wiki that I used for OSCON is http://pbwiki.com
The features that made it awesome for "event registration" were:
- Per page passwords (we indicated what the password was in the body
of the page - at this point, bots don't seem to pick that up)
- When modifying a page, users are asked to enter their email address
and whether they want to be notified when the page changes
- Email to page creator/owners when pages are updated includes the
email address of the new users, making it easy to contact people
If the new "advocacy wiki" is in the postgresql.org namespace,
something with those features would most likely prevent the kind of
"porn + postgresql" synergy Greg mentioned earlier today.
Particularly, the per-page passwords seem to prevent spam. (of
course, its probably just a mater of time...)
Not that this will make Dave, Greg et al. feel much better, but I can
help moderate the new wiki-space.
-selena
PDXPUG wrangler
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
@ 2007-08-05 08:08 Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 15:02 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Dave Page @ 2007-08-05 08:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>; +Cc: Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
> ------- Original Message -------
> From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email protected]>
> To: Dave Page <[email protected]>
> Sent: 05/08/07, 00:54:16
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
>
> And you think, that I don't recognize the *exact* level of what needs to
> be confidential or that by chance I would not communicate in discrete
> and finite detail of what a potential or existing sponsor would wish to
> be known?
Well I would have thought so, but as you seem to be using it as an argument for managing and publishing information on a wiki I'm really not sure.
> We do indeed need sponsor management, I can either do it the hard way,
> which is to draw up a new page every time or I can do it the easy way in
> which to have a dynamic interface that is easy to manage.
>
> The hard way, is exactly why we have neglected our partners (sponsors)
> to date, because of time, and resources. It is also the exact same
> reason that Berkus has *also* not provided a new sponsors page.
So when was the last time you asked for an update?
And even if it did become a chore, we would move it into the database (trivial for us), not use a wiki. That way we could keep the confidential info confined to the admin interface.
/D
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-05 08:08 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-05 15:02 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 15:28 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Joshua D. Drake @ 2007-08-05 15:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Page <[email protected]>; +Cc: Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Dave Page wrote:
>
>> ------- Original Message -------
>> From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email protected]>
>> To: Dave Page <[email protected]>
>> Sent: 05/08/07, 00:54:16
>> Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
>>
>> And you think, that I don't recognize the *exact* level of what needs to
>> be confidential or that by chance I would not communicate in discrete
>> and finite detail of what a potential or existing sponsor would wish to
>> be known?
>
> Well I would have thought so, but as you seem to be using it as an argument for managing and publishing information on a wiki I'm really not sure.
That's funny. I almost laughed.
>> The hard way, is exactly why we have neglected our partners (sponsors)
>> to date, because of time, and resources. It is also the exact same
>> reason that Berkus has *also* not provided a new sponsors page.
>
> So when was the last time you asked for an update?
>
> And even if it did become a chore, we would move it into the database (trivial for us), not use a wiki. That way we could keep the confidential info confined to the admin interface.
Uhmm I never suggested using the wiki for sponsor management. My sponsor
management page suggestion was in correlation to your remark that I
could just request stuff from -www that I needed.
Perhaps you should follow your own thread.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
>
> /D
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
>
- --
=== 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/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGteafATb/zqfZUUQRAteKAKCVqI2FN4vT6lRw/zrIGtBQhnoGwACgiDgH
OhwDN1s3uo8AkOgdkkKxnyg=
=EkMl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-05 08:08 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 15:02 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-05 15:28 ` Dave Page <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Dave Page @ 2007-08-05 15:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>; +Cc: Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Uhmm I never suggested using the wiki for sponsor management. My sponsor
> management page suggestion was in correlation to your remark that I
> could just request stuff from -www that I needed.
Well clearly we're talking at cross purposes then, 'cos as I understand
it the original argument was about not using a wiki for user facing
stuff, to which you argued it saved having to figure out the
technicalities of how to add stuff to the main website, and gave sponsor
management as an example.
> Perhaps you should follow your own thread.
Right back at ya :-)
/D
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
@ 2007-08-05 08:29 Dave Page <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Dave Page @ 2007-08-05 08:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>; +Cc: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
> ------- Original Message -------
> From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email protected]>
> To: Dave Page <[email protected]>
> Sent: 05/08/07, 00:58:19
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
>
> It isn't difficult, it is unexpected. You don't manage content via
> webmaster@, that is stupid. We are not talking about one off edits for a
> spelling mistake here.
Right, now you twisting what we we're talking about. You asked how people get changes made if even you didn't know what to do.
I said they mainly email webmaster, which isn't an opinion about what should happen. It is fact, it does happen regularly.
>Now I would concur that -www would make
> reasonable sense, but my point, was that we might have a perception
> problem.
*We* interact on -www when something is more than a simple action item, and I'd expect you to mail any requests there because you are well aware that that is where we discuss web stuff. Everything else can and does feed in via webmaster.
> I was trying to be helpful and I repeat:
>
> Where is the, "How to contribute to the PostgreSQL.Org website HOWTO?".
>
> If it doesn't exist, does it by chance make sense to have one? If not,
> why not? It isn't like this is the first time people have brought up the
> point that it isn't as easy as it could be to contribute to the website.
The technical howto is in the root of the source. I don't recall ever being asked for a non-technical howto.
If you feel we need a faq or doc item to tell ppl how to join -www and get started, please feel free to write a patch for the developer faq or raise the issue on -www if you feel it should go elsewhere on the website.
/D
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
@ 2007-08-05 08:35 Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 18:48 ` Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Gregory Stark <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 74+ messages in thread
From: Dave Page @ 2007-08-05 08:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>; +Cc: Josh Berkus <[email protected]>; [email protected]; pgsql-www
> ------- Original Message -------
> From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email protected]>
> To: Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
> Sent: 05/08/07, 01:46:54
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
>
>
> Open up the wiki to signups with email confirmation. Give half a dozen
> people we trust access to manage users and rollback content.
>
> Call it good.
I must admit I thought we had all agreed that a while back and were discussing related issues now! :-)
Greg, can you arrange what JD has mentioned above please?
We should all keep an eye out for any spam or vandalism, and if it becomes a problem, review the signup process again.
/D
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
2007-08-05 08:35 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
@ 2007-08-05 18:48 ` Gregory Stark <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Gregory Stark @ 2007-08-05 18:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Page <[email protected]>; +Cc: Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>; Josh Berkus <[email protected]>; [email protected]; pgsql-www
"Dave Page" <[email protected]> writes:
>> Open up the wiki to signups with email confirmation. Give half a dozen
>> people we trust access to manage users and rollback content.
>>
>> Call it good.
>
> I must admit I thought we had all agreed that a while back and were
> discussing related issues now! :-)
One slightly more restrictive policy which might make everyone happy is to
only accept these confirmations if they correspond to emails subscribed to one
of the appropriate lists -- after all we don't want people editing pages
without being at least potentially participating in discussions about those
same pages.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
@ 2007-08-05 16:03 Dave Page <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 74+ messages in thread
From: Dave Page @ 2007-08-05 16:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>; +Cc: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; Robert Treat <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; pgsql-www
> ------- Original Message -------
> From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email protected]>
> To: Dave Page <[email protected]>
> Sent: 05/08/07, 16:35:58
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
>
> We could pray and hope but then reality would crush us ;)
Damn that reality, getting in the way again!
/D
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 74+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-08-07 21:54 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 74+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-08-03 22:33 We need an Advocacy wiki Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-03 22:41 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-03 23:04 ` Marc G. Fournier <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 13:56 ` Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 14:20 ` Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:15 ` Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 15:24 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:57 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-06 06:00 ` Greg Smith <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:44 ` Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:59 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:03 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:18 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 21:19 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:23 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:28 ` Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:39 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 18:18 ` Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 21:20 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 08:13 ` Tino Wildenhain <[email protected]>
2007-08-06 06:10 ` Greg Smith <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 08:11 ` Tino Wildenhain <[email protected]>
2007-08-07 18:43 ` Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:56 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:16 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 21:18 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:47 ` Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 16:48 ` Gregory Stark <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:02 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:10 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:21 ` Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:49 ` Lukas Kahwe Smith <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:13 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:54 ` Lukas Kahwe Smith <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 18:00 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 18:04 ` Lukas Kahwe Smith <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 21:14 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 21:18 ` Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 23:59 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:50 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 18:17 ` Neil Conway <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 18:21 ` Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 17:55 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 20:19 ` Robert Treat <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 20:31 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 18:30 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 18:59 ` Neil Conway <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 19:32 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 21:08 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-07 18:41 ` Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-07 18:49 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-07 19:04 ` Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-07 21:54 ` Decibel! <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 21:59 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 23:54 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 09:19 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 15:05 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 15:29 ` Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 15:35 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 18:16 ` Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 22:14 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 22:06 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-04 23:58 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 00:41 ` Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 00:46 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 01:43 ` Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
2007-08-06 21:56 ` Selena Deckelmann <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 08:08 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 15:02 ` Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 15:28 ` Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 08:29 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 08:35 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 18:48 ` Gregory Stark <[email protected]>
2007-08-05 16:03 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki Dave Page <[email protected]>
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox