Re: A FAQ that needs updating?

[Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>]

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 12:01:26 -0500 (EST)
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>
> > Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > > Hash: SHA1
> > >
> > > On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 11:45:43 -0500 (EST)
> > > Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > >
> > > > One week later and this web site remains unchanged.  :-(
> > > >
> > > > 	http://www.postgresql.org/about/press/faq
> > > Who controls the FAQ?
> > I would like to know myself.  I assume Josh Berkus but am just
> > guessing. Can we just remove the last three items on that page?
>
> O.k. just so I am 100% clear :) We are talking about the /press/faq
> right? If so... IMO the following needs to happen:
>
> The press FAQ should be a section (internal ref of course) within the
> general FAQ as I am guessing there is some significant overlap.
>
> I believe that press should be replaced with the word Advocacy or maybe
> Advocacy & Press.
>
> All redundant information should be removed between the general and
> press advocacy sections.
>
> Add a section on the FAQ page for the Advocacy & Press section that
> links to the section within the general FAQ.
>
> Appropriate rewrites put in place to push all requests for the old FAQ
> to the new (and proper) one.
>
> Thoughts?

IIRC, the press FAQ is translated to lots of languages, and the general 
one isn't.

That said, I agree that it's a problem since it will often be outdated...

//Magnus