Received: from localhost (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47DDE9FB607; Sat, 4 Aug 2007 14:15:49 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 86173-01; Sat, 4 Aug 2007 14:15:44 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from svr2.hagander.net (svr2.hagander.net [88.198.128.226]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB19D9FB669; Sat, 4 Aug 2007 14:15:44 -0300 (ADT) Received: from dynamic.hagander.net ([127.0.0.1]) (encrypted and authenticated) by svr2.hagander.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7334DDCC40F; Sat, 4 Aug 2007 19:15:43 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <46B4B459.6010901@hagander.net> Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2007 19:16:09 +0200 From: Magnus Hagander User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Joshua D. Drake" CC: Dave Page , Robert Treat , pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org, Greg Sabino Mullane , pgsql-www@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki References: <200708041020.36108.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> <46B4980C.5040700@postgresql.org> <46B4AFC0.2030403@commandprompt.com> In-Reply-To: <46B4AFC0.2030403@commandprompt.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200708/46 X-Sequence-Number: 12287 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 and

tags, along with possibly a couple of :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