Can we get back to the main work of Advocacy? I still need help composing
the 8.0 press release. Below is the last non-fragmentary post.
Can some people here please take a stab at explaining each major feature to
the layman? 10-20 words each. Thanks!
I'd like to see some sample text here. But please remember that the *entire*
press release will be less than 1000 words, so no paragraph-long descriptions
of a single feature! (for example, Rod's description of replication options
was nice but would have to be condensed to about 14 words, if we include it
at all) More detailed descriptions will go on our "news" page.
As a compromise between Peter's perspective and mine/Andrew's, I think that we
should focus on the features but name-drop. So we need to work in company
names at appropriate points, namely Fujitsu, Afilias, Red Hat, Open Source
Development Labs, Command Prompt, 2nd Quadrant, and SRA-America (am I
forgetting someone?). The names should get across the multi-company
involvement without dwelling on it.
Please take a stab at:
P1: announce landmark 8.0 version, 200 developers, etc. 4-5 lines, starting
with a sentence that covers who-what-when.
P2: major features, windows port, contributions by several new companies,
work with OSDL. 4-5 lines, again.
List: Major features:
-- each of the above should include 10 to 20 words about what the feature is
and why people should be excited about it.
P4: discuss major add-ins: Slony-I, PL/perlNG, PL/Java, etc.
"more features for dedicated PG users, see full release".
-- this paragraph will just *mention* the new add-ins for the last year; there
is no need (or space) to go into detail. My purpose for this paragraph is
that for a lot of news sources, this is the only coverage of PG they will
have all year, making it important to mention prominent add-ins let the
public think we are missing features.
Aglio Database Solutions
pgsql-advocacy by date
|Next:||From: elein||Date: 2004-08-27 17:45:05|
|Subject: flyer links|
|Previous:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2004-08-27 14:28:45|
|Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Quality Evaluation|