Robert Treat wrote:
>>- No discussion of change on the list. Something that keeps being
>>advocated, yet rarely happens, if at all.
> Uh... I posted the sample to the list, Dave reviewed it and applied a change.
> There were no objections at the time he did so. Do we have to take a vote on
> *every* *single* *thing* that is going to be changed on the site? I
> certainly have no desire to live with that kind of micro-management
This "single thing" is on front page of the site. It's the most
important, highly visible part of the site. *Of course* it should be
discussed. Especially if it's the "go live" text.
>>Perhaps it would be wise to think about and thoroughly discuss a change
>>prior to committing it to CVS, especially if the intention is to go live
> Eat your own dog food; you reverted Dave's change without saying anything to
> anyone on this list. If I were the type to get into pissing contests I'd do
> the same right back to you.
There has already been a discussion and agreement about the text. What
it was *prior* to the Christmas-related text is what was agreed upon, so
it was set back to that. This isn't difficult to change--it would take a
couple of minutes at most to change the content once there is proper
agreement on it, even if that means putting the Christmas-related text
You suggested the change, and Dave applied it. There was no thought of
implications, and no consensus reached (two is not a consensus.)
The problem is assuming people are happy with something just because
they don't say anything. Most people on the list lurk and observe, but
don't comment. That isn't agreement.
The point is that there has to be more discussion, and more time for it.
If a proper discussion had ensued about this point, the same *message*
could have been integrated into the front page, with, e.g., a "Happy
Holidays from the PostgreSQL team" heading, and better written text. And
it could have been made to look much better than what it did.
Absolute control over what goes into the website should not be in the
hands of two people. No, one is not expected to discuss changes to minor
things, fixing up formatting, etc. But to change the front page text
without weighing up the implications, the advantages and disadvantages,
the message that it sends on behalf of the PostgreSQL group, without
proper discussion is irresponsible.
Perhaps the proposal to change the text should have been started in a
separate thread, as introducing it within a very long thread about
something else is going to increase the chance of oversight by the list
That we're now discussing the content properly, with input from all
sides, is exactly what should have happened in the first place, prior to
committing the Christmas-related change.
In response to
pgsql-www by date
|Next:||From: Omar Kilani||Date: 2004-12-22 05:03:46|
|Subject: Site is not ready for launch [Was: Re: Launch now???]|
|Previous:||From: Joshua D. Drake||Date: 2004-12-22 04:39:54|
|Subject: Re: Inappropriate changes to front page text [Was: Re: |