X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A5729FB1CD; Sat, 16 Sep 2006 16:40:22 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 87951-08; Sat, 16 Sep 2006 16:40:14 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from localhost.localdomain (host86-130-26-100.range86-130.btcentralplus.com [86.130.26.100]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8297F9FA004; Sat, 16 Sep 2006 16:40:14 -0300 (ADT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=localhost.localdomain) by localhost.localdomain with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1GOg1E-00028S-Ci; Sat, 16 Sep 2006 20:40:04 +0100 From: Gregory Stark To: Josh Berkus Cc: pgsql-www@postgresql.org, Martijn van Oosterhout , Neil Conway , Dave Page , "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Developer's Wiki In-Reply-To: <200609161225.16961.josh@agliodbs.com> (Josh Berkus's message of "Sat, 16 Sep 2006 12:25:16 -0700") Organization: EnterpriseDB References: <61929.69.197.146.229.1157340613.squirrel@69.197.146.229> <20060904061123.GA16894@svana.org> <200609161225.16961.josh@agliodbs.com> X-Draft-From: ("nnimap+webmail.enterprisedb.com:Inbox" 2913) Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 20:40:04 +0100 Message-ID: <877j03y50r.fsf@enterprisedb.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.748 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, FORGED_RCVD_HELO, RCVD_IN_NJABL_DUL X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 200609/132 X-Sequence-Number: 10710 Josh Berkus writes: >> I was actually hoping for more feedback on the content itself. I'm >> still not clear if it's supposed to be "developers only - to the >> exclusion of users" or "developers only - but accessable to anyone". > > It should be readable by everyone, but editable only by authorized users. I think the lessons of wikipedia is precisely that you *don't* want to add such barriers. You want to let people add stuff pretty much freely. That encourages people to get involved and put up information. Experience shows that most people are cooperative most of the time. If there turns out to be particularly contentious areas you can restrict access to those areas to authorized users or ban ip addresses. I've already put some stuff up there. I didn't plan to, but when I was browsing I had ideas and the ability to add content was just one click away... -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com