> I'd like to point out that the design we have now  is adequate, while
> the content is not. I'd also like to remind that the new site was made easy
> to skin, so applying the newer design will take a small amount of time.
> Fixing and porting the content will take a much longer time, though.
> Therefore, I'm willing to support Omar's design, but *after* the content
> fixing and porting work is finished. This work may continue even in the
> current design.
I was under the impression that porting the content to Lucasz' design, putting
it up, applying Omar's design, and then re-arranging the content to fit
Omar's design, was much more work than just doing Omar's design. Was I
And Omar has already ported part of the content to his design as an example,
and is willing to do more. It would be one thing if you'd said that
Lucasz' design was the only way we'd get a new site up by 8.0, but you've not
said that ... so both options seem to be equivalent, and Omar's is the better
looking design, at least I've not seen anyone say otherwise.
> Why do I feel I am in the middle of some political power grab?
There's power to grab? I never noticed. All this time .... Off with their
heads! Oh, it feels so good. ;->
> Omar has
> been submitting patches which are being reviewed and getting committed
> so things seem ok there.
Yes, but Omar splitting his time between his design and Lucasz's is far less
effective than Omar working full time on his design.
> I have already laid out a case for problems in
> Lukacz's design that I don't see anyone interested in addressing, but by
> the same token I still have not seen a "stretchy" version of Omar's
> design which we have said we need to see before we can swap.
Who's "we"? I don't recall a spec document anywhere that says that the
design has to be "stretchy", nor do I recall any discussion on this list to
that effect. Maybe my memory is faulty, give me a link.
Robert, I can recall a period last year where you were justifiably very angry
at Core for making decisions and refusing to discuss the reasons publically.
Now you are doing the same; saying that you have a right to guide the web
site because you, Dave, Alexey and Devrim do most of the work (which you do)
and that you don't have to discuss your reasons with anyone. While the
former is justifiable, the latter is not. Not when Core does it, and not
when you do it.
You may have very good reasons, but you've not expressed them anywhere I can
read them. So if you do, then open up.
From my perspective:
1) Omar's design is undeniably better-looking and easier to navigate than
2) Porting to Omar's design rather than Lucasz's will make no difference in
the go-live time of the web site;
3) Omar has demonstrated that he will be around to help with the port, which I
don't think Lucasz is (since www-committers has no public archive, I can't
tell if Lucasz has been helping quietly in the background).
If either of these points is debatable, then let's talk them out. But so far
I've not seen a single statement from you, Dave, or Alexey contradicting any
of the above.
> These calls
> for voting are just hand-waving IMHO.
No, it's a vote on what we want Omar and others to work on; patching Lucasz's
design or porting to his own. I vote the latter -- unless, of course, you
want to argue the 3 points above.
Aglio Database Solutions
In response to
pgsql-www by date
|Next:||From: Marc G. Fournier||Date: 2004-11-19 19:19:21|
|Subject: Re: Vote on Omar Design|
|Previous:||From: Joshua D. Drake||Date: 2004-11-19 18:57:31|
|Subject: Re: Vote on Omar Design|