Re: Press Release -- Just Waiting for Tom

Seems like this didn't go through so I am resending it.
--------------- Forwarded message (begin)

Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Press Release -- Just Waiting for Tom
From: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 21:33:09 -0500

I updated the web version with changes as noted below.

greg(at)turnstep(dot)com wrote:
>> Last-minute copy edits, please, people?
>
> Be careful what you ask for! :) Away we go...
>
> The names at the top should indicate what country each person
> is in, perhaps next to the phone number in parenthesis.
>
> The "Contact: " should be on its own line, and perhaps say
> "Contacts:" since it refers to both Justin and Mark.
>

done. not to sound americentric, but do we think it might be a problem that
we don't have anyone from the US in our contacts list?

> "the best has gotten even better!" sounds pretty dorky.
>

hmm.. it beat out the coolest has gotten even cooler and the 37713ist has
gotten even 37713er, have any suggestions?

> I'd move "freely available" to another sentence as it is wordy
> enough already.
>
> "version" should be spelled out - those reading may not naturally
> know what v7.3 means.
>

I'd almost be in favor of calling it PostgreSQL 7.3, but this needs to be
done in a uniform manner, so for now I changed it to version 7.3

> We may want to simply call it a RDBMS, as it will be more familiar
> to the press than the ORDBMS acronym. Tough call.
>

I actually agree with Mark on this one. It helps differentiate us from some
of the open source databases that call themselves an rdbms even though they
arn't.

> The first paragraph should probably have a little more emphasis
> on ideas like "features", "maturity", "stability", and "powerfulness"
> and a little less on the cost/savings angle.
>
>> saving business and government millions of dollars each year.
>
> Should this be "businesses and governments"? Perhaps simply
> "saving businesses millions...."?

done

>
> The quote attributions should have some sort of delimiter immediately
> before them, such as a single or double dash.
>

done

> Some of the quotes have bad grammar (esp. the Mohawk one) but if it
> is a verbatim quote, there is not much that can be done. A period
> after "ODBC" and a capital "W" might be acceptable however?
>

I left these alone since I assume they are word for word quotes; can anyone
verify this?

>> The worldwide PostgreSQL community is very excited about this release,
>> which includes numerous modifications and enhancements thanks to the
>> contributions of 573 developers and thousands of volunteer testers
>> from more than 30 countries.
>
> I think an abstract number for the developers would sound better
> and be more truthful: "over 570 developers". I also didn't like
> the fact that my previous parsing only found 38 countries, so I
> did some more digging in the email lists and we can definitely say
> "over 50" if the number is including "testers" as well as "developers".
> I found: fi, pt, cl, hr, in, lk, sg, py, tb, and many others to easily
> boost the number to over 50. :)
>

went with more than 500 developers and 50 countries...

>> "This is a quote from Tom Lane about the
>> new version," said Tom Lane, a PostgreSQL Core
>> Developer. Among the advances in version 7.3 are:
>
> The "Among" should probably begin a new paragraph. Maybe the Tom
> quote as well, depending on its length.
>

I was htinking of just writing in "Tom Lane could not be reached in time
for
this release, but a spokesperson for the core group said that "the source
code pretty much speaks for itself"... :-)

>> PostgreSQL now joins the handful of ORDBMSs to support
>
> The paragraph is good, but the "handful of ORDBMs" sounds awkward.
> Also, we should avoid English colloquialisms if possible due
> to the international nature of the site.
>

well, I think we are going for an arbitrary number that implies a msall
number. or maybe we can just say "the small number of ..."?

> Aside: "ORDBMSs" can be written as "ORDBMS's" - an apostrophe is
> acceptable usage as a plural when using an acronym ending
> in the letter S.
>
>> 7.3 has greatly simplified returning result sets of rows and columns in
>
> The product should be consistently referred to as "PostgreSQL" or
> "PostgreSQL 7.3", or even "Version 7.3", but not simply "7.3".
>
>> Oracle applications to PostgreSQL.
>
> "Oracle" will need a copyright symbol and a disclaimer on the bottom
> to be totally legit.
>
>> In response to community demands, PostgreSQL has added schema,
>> function, and other permissions and settings to increase the database
>> administrator's granular control over security.
>
> A bit awkward, but not too bad.
>
>> Other Enhancements
>> Version 7.3 also includes:
>
> The double indent looks a bit odd. Perhaps simply saying:
> "Other enhancements in version 7.3 include:"?
>
>> - Dozens of bug fixes and performance enhancements to maintain
>> PostgreSQL's leading position in ORDMBSs.
>
> This is the first time in this article that we have mentioned
> that we are in the "leading position" and it seems odd to throw it
> out here, at the bottom of the new features list. Also, the "dozens
> of bug fixes" implies dozens of bugs, so that could possibly
> be left out.
>

Does switching the order sound better?
- Dozens of performance enhancements and bug fixes to maintain
PostgreSQL's leading position in ORDMBSs.

I'm not against leaving out the bug fixes if no one else has a problem with
it. Do we think people will read the release and post to -general "Did
they fix any of the bugs in the system?"...

>> Source for this release is available on all mirrors under:
>> http://www.postgresql.org/pub/source/v7.3
>
> This is a bad URL to give out. The URL as entered above into a
> browser returns a 404 error. (ideally it should return a list of mirrors
> and then redirect, but that's an issue for another day). In addition,
> the casual reader may not understand the concept of "mirrors".
>
>> http://advocacy.postgresql.org
>
> This should have a trailing slash on it.
>
>> A complete list of changes in v7.3 can be found in the HISTORY file,
>> included with the release, or available from all ftp mirrors as:
>> http://www.postgresql.org/README.v7_3
>
> Same problem as above (404). In addition, the sudden mention of
> "ftp" mirrors could be confusing. Maybe we can redirect everything
> through the advocacy site? Linking to a page on advocacy that states
> the latest versions, how to get them, and links to the history file
> might be one way.
>

I changed the first two links but left the third alone. Actually I thought
it was wierd that we say to look in the HISZTORY file but the file we point
to is called README... Is there a valid link for this somewhere? If not,
can we just make a page somewhere that shows all of the changes in 7.3 and
link to that?

>> .. With it's long time support
>
> This should be "its"; it's is used only as a contraction.
>

world's = possesive form for the world so wouldn't it's also show
possesivness for it?

>> .. triggers, and subqueries PostgreSQL
>
> Should be a comma after "subqueries"
>
>> is being used by many of todays most demanding businesses.
>
> "today's" should have an apostrophe.
>
>> Corporations such as BASF, Red Hat, Afilias Inc (managing the .org
>> and .info domains), Cisco, Chrysler, and 3Com rely on
>
> Afilias is a limited corporation, and should be written as
> "Afilias Limited" or simply "Afilias". The others have more
> official names (e.g. "Red Hat, Inc.") but the short names
> used above should be fine for a press release.
>
>> For more information on PostgreSQL, please visit
>> http://advocacy.postgresql.org.
>
> The URL should be on its own line, and include a trailing slash.
>
> Greg Sabino Mullane greg(at)turnstep(dot)com

thanks for the feedback Greg :-)

Robert Treat