Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Tech Docs and Consultants

From: "" <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: Scott Lamb <slamb(at)slamb(dot)org>
Cc: "" <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>,Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in>,"" <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Tech Docs and Consultants
Date: 2003-04-25 12:51:43
Message-ID: 1051275103.3ea92f5f50812@webmail.postgresql.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy
Quoting Scott Lamb <slamb(at)slamb(dot)org>:

> Okay, I'm looking back at this thread from a week ago about using CVS  
> for the websites. I'm not trying to beat a dead horse here, but the  
> more I look at it, the more I think that the arguments that convinced  
> me were not good.
> 
> On Tuesday, Apr 15, 2003, at 12:46 US/Central, ""  
> <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
> > One of the significant contributing reasons to the jobs.postgresql.org
>  
> > site not
> > getting off the ground was because everyone who wanted to work on it 
> 
> > had to
> > commit to CVS in order to do anything.
> 
> Where was this discussed? I looked for like a pgsql-jobs and  
> pgsql-jobs-cvs mailing list and found nothing.

There was a private mailing list that the people who volunteered subscribed to.


> I don't think jobs.postgresql.org is a good example of this not  
> working, because from what little I can see from here, CVS is not why  
> it failed. No one knew about it, it didn't have the same sort of  
> associated stuff that would be expected for a code project.

CVS is definitely one of the larger factors to why it failed.  *But* don't get
me wrong, it wasn't the primary cause, just one of the factors.

The reason I'm against CVS for the techdocs site is because I believe it raises
the "barrier to entry" far higher than what a site based on _community edited
content_ should be.

Sure, there can be a number of ways of doing any of this, and CVS could work in
some situations... but it unnecessarily reduces the number of people that can
participate.

<snip> 
> Scott


In response to

Responses

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Robert TreatDate: 2003-04-25 15:09:18
Subject: Re: Free advertising opportunity for PostgreSQL
Previous:From: Shridhar DaithankarDate: 2003-04-25 08:29:21
Subject: Re: Free advertising opportunity for PostgreSQL in the "The Open Source Reference Book 2003"

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group