Re: PostgreSQL moderation report: 2009-6-16

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL WWW List <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL moderation report: 2009-6-16
Date: 2009-06-16 14:48:56
Message-ID: 4A37B0D8.4040102@hagander.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-www

Dave Page wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Tom Lane<tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> webmaster(at)postgresql(dot)org writes:
>>> PostgreSQL.org moderation report - 2009-6-16 13:57:0.
>>> There are 40 documentation comment(s) requiring moderation.
>>> There are 7 event(s) requiring moderation.
>>> There are 2 news item(s) requiring moderation.
>>> There are 1 organisation(s) requiring moderation.
>>> There are 2 professional service(s) requiring moderation.
>>> Moderators; please check and moderate these items as soon as possible!
>> Why is this being sent to the -www list?
>
> To coax/shame the moderators that obviously aren't listening on the
> moderation list into clearing the queue. It runs twice a week, and
> will only send an email if there is anything outstanding. Which
> hopefully, will rarely be the case.

Not having looked at the script (though I expect it's in svn, even
though the activity mail has been broken for a long time there *cough*),
would it be possible to have it only send it if there are things
overdue? I realize there's a bunch of things overdue now, but in theory
it could be a comment added 5 minutes before the script ran - with
nobody having a chance to send it.

Or perhaps it already does this, and this just shows I was too lazy to
check?

--
Magnus Hagander
Self: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-www by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Page 2009-06-16 14:59:02 Re: PostgreSQL moderation report: 2009-6-16
Previous Message Dave Page 2009-06-16 14:47:04 Re: PostgreSQL moderation report: 2009-6-16