Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki

From: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: "Robert Treat" <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
Date: 2007-08-04 17:13:34
Message-ID: 200708041813350000@3057932291
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-www

> ------- Original Message -------
> From: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
> To: Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>
> 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

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2007-08-04 17:16:09 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2007-08-04 17:10:07 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki

Browse pgsql-www by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2007-08-04 17:16:09 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2007-08-04 17:10:07 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki