Gregory Stark wrote:
> Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>>> I was actually hoping for more feedback on the content itself. I'm
>>> still not clear if it's supposed to be "developers only - to the
>>> exclusion of users" or "developers only - but accessable to anyone".
>> It should be readable by everyone, but editable only by authorized users.
> I think the lessons of wikipedia is precisely that you *don't* want to add
> such barriers. You want to let people add stuff pretty much freely. That
> encourages people to get involved and put up information.
I don't agree, you should also look at the recent post and fork by one
of wikipedia's co-founders. The developers wiki should only be edited by
Now, getting authorized should be easy as reasonably possible, but
having a wholesale editing orgy on the wiki responsible for tracking
postgresql developer information is not a good idea.
Joshua D. Drake
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
In response to
pgsql-www by date
|Next:||From: Gavin M. Roy||Date: 2006-09-16 21:55:09|
|Subject: Re: Status of funds.postgresql.org?|
|Previous:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2006-09-16 20:09:49|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Developer's Wiki|
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Jim C. Nasby||Date: 2006-09-16 21:02:35|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Is there any utility to update the table whenever text file gets changed?|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2006-09-16 20:19:48|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Timezone List |