Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Vote on Omar Design

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Vote on Omar Design
Date: 2004-11-19 19:07:44
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-www
Alexey, Robert,

> I'd like to point out that the design we have now [1] 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.


Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

In response to


pgsql-www by date

Next:From: Marc G. FournierDate: 2004-11-19 19:19:21
Subject: Re: Vote on Omar Design
Previous:From: Joshua D. DrakeDate: 2004-11-19 18:57:31
Subject: Re: Vote on Omar Design

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group