| From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)myrealbox(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>, PostgreSQL WWW Mailing List <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: On-line docs for PG 8.1 need updating |
| Date: | 2005-11-07 20:43:13 |
| Message-ID: | 1131396193.6884.108.camel@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-www |
On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 11:03 +0900, Michael Glaesemann wrote:
> I agree with your points. One reservation I have is that people might
> be more likely to run a beta in a production environment. Nowadays it
> seems increasingly common for projects to release betas for
> widespread circulation. I don't know if this is something that should
> be encouraged for PostgreSQL. I'd hate to see people get a bad
> impression of PostgreSQL because a beta screws up their data.
IMHO it is fairly clearly a good thing to get more publicity for
Postgres betas. That is the whole point of the beta program in the first
place: I don't see that putting more beta information on the main
website is fundamentally different from sending email announcing betas
to -announce, for example. Provided that the caveats are clear, I think
there's a lot to be gained by publicizing betas more effectively.
-Neil
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2005-11-07 20:50:42 | Re: On-line docs for PG 8.1 need updating |
| Previous Message | Dave Page | 2005-11-07 08:37:58 | Re: On-line docs for PG 8.1 need updating |