Re: Wiki clarification

On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 22:09, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> To clarify what I'm suggesting - I'm suggesting vendors set up a page
>> about their own product somewhere on their own site, be it a wiki or
>> something else. If they don't have one, on a simple google site or
>> even a github wiki.
>>
>> postgresql.org will then link to this from our product catalogue,
>> which is on the website, just like we do for other commercial
>> products. That way we (the project) provide equal level of visibility
>> for third party software, and it's entirely up to the vendor exactly
>> what type of information to keep on the page/wiki.
>
> - -1. Our software catalog is nowhere near as visible as our wiki.

If that is the case, I propose we remove the software catalog. Having
both only contributes to confusion for the users.

Should we also move things like lists of support providers etc to the
wiki, so the companies can put more of their info in there? Seems to
be a pretty similar case?

> In short, I'd like to see more on the wiki, commerical or no, I think we're
> a mature enough community to be able to self-police any blatant commercial
> abuse of the wiki.

As long as you define where the line is between "use" and "abuse".
Especially in the context of the community, that's not necessarily
trivial. Some people consider the one page posted there to be abuse.
Some people consider a single blog post including a link to a
commercial product abuse. Others don't. So it needs to be defined -
both for those poor bastards who are supposed to police it, and for
those who will eventually end up getting policed because they didn't
know where the line was. With a clear policy, it makes life easier for
both those.

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