X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (wm.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 379359FB2A5 for ; Tue, 15 Aug 2006 12:32:06 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 22589-04 for ; Tue, 15 Aug 2006 15:31:57 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: delayed 00:27:36.837139 by SQLgrey- Received: from mx-2.sollentuna.net (mx-2.sollentuna.net [195.84.163.199]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 280269FB29F for ; Tue, 15 Aug 2006 12:31:56 -0300 (ADT) Received: from ALGOL.sollentuna.se (janus.sollentuna.se [62.65.68.67]) by mx-2.sollentuna.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2D9CF40DA; Tue, 15 Aug 2006 17:04:16 +0200 (CEST) Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Subject: Re: Postgres Wiki Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 17:04:29 +0200 Message-ID: <6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCEA0FB24@algol.sollentuna.se> In-Reply-To: <1155653805.2726.54.camel@laptop.gunduz.org> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [pgsql-www] Postgres Wiki Thread-Index: AcbAev3pS2lSxr0MS12fbwr/q0SmxAAAMKtA From: "Magnus Hagander" To: "Devrim GUNDUZ" , "Greg Sabino Mullane" Cc: X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.134 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO, SPF_PASS X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200608/95 X-Sequence-Number: 10486 > > For better or worse, the Postgres Wiki is now up and running: > >=20 > > http://wiki.postgresql.org >=20 > Great! I pushed RPM Installation article there. I'll report=20 > you if I experience problems. >=20 > I believe that wiki will help us a lot for writing docs. Just took a quick look at this one. Ignore for a moment the fact that I don't like Wikis in general - I'm definitly not going to argue not to have one for developers :-) Let's leave that part behind.. However, what's the rationale for putting this up on svr1? I would consider that one our most critical server, considering it runs the cvs repository. I would rather see the number of services on such an important machine *decrease* than increase. If you need "internal examples", we've already seen with the old svr2/wwwmaster box how messy things can get with a large mix of services -and how easy it is to end up with things with security issues in there. //Magnus