Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: On-line docs for PG 8.1 need updating
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 08:37:58 -0000
Message-ID: 
 <E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E4CC3969@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk>
Thread-Topic: [pgsql-www] On-line docs for PG 8.1 need updating
Thread-Index: AcXjP6HTOcxzgSkvSZ+QOQ+5SVuWXwANr/9g
From: "Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
To: "Michael Glaesemann" <grzm@myrealbox.com>,
	"Neil Conway" <neilc@samurai.com>
Cc: "Magnus Hagander" <mha@sollentuna.net>, "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
	"PostgreSQL WWW Mailing List" <pgsql-www@postgresql.org>

=20

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-www-owner@postgresql.org=20
> [mailto:pgsql-www-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Michael=20
> Glaesemann
> Sent: 07 November 2005 02:04
> To: Neil Conway
> Cc: Magnus Hagander; Tom Lane; Dave Page; PostgreSQL WWW Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] On-line docs for PG 8.1 need updating
>=20
>=20
> On Nov 7, 2005, at 6:46 , Neil Conway wrote:
>=20
> > On Sun, 2005-06-11 at 22:37 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >> That's intentional, it's scheduled to go up along with the press =20
> >> release
> >> and related info once the release is done.
> >
> > What is the reasoning for this? IMHO for future releases it=20
> would be a
> > better idea to make the beta documentation a part of the main =20
> > website's
> > list of documentation at about the same time the first beta is =20
> > released.
> > That would make the documentation easier to find and would also
> > encourage more people to use the beta.
>=20
> I agree with your points. One reservation I have is that=20
> people might =20
> be more likely to run a beta in a production environment.=20
> Nowadays it =20
> seems increasingly common for projects to release betas for =20
> widespread circulation. I don't know if this is something=20
> that should =20
> be encouraged for PostgreSQL. I'd hate to see people get a bad =20
> impression of PostgreSQL because a beta screws up their data.=20
> Putting =20
> it on the top page might lend it more credibility and lead people to =20
> trust it in environments they shouldn't--even though PostgreSQL =20
> hackers are very clear that beta should not be used in production.
>=20
> I'd guess these things are better discussed on -advocacy.

Probably not - It's me that does the job, and if you discuss it there it
won't make any difference as I won't see it :-)

Regards, Dave.