Robert,
> If we are going to discuss adding a KB to the postgresql.org sites,
> shouldn't we discuss it right here?
No, for two reasons: (1) the KB project includes contacts for some
corporate supporters who aren't prepared for the "attitude" common from
some posters on this (and other) main postgresql mailing lists, and (2)
this list is too large and diffuse to make decisions quickly on a narrowly
defined project.
For those reasons, we're going to use a seperate mailing list to do the
detailed planning and coordinate with this list over integration,
infrastructure, and *broad* goals. In other words, I'm happy to discuss
*whether* to add the KB we build to PostgreSQL.org here, but not how to
build it.
> And didn't we have this discussion
> of requirements once already before Gevik looked into drupal?
I reviewed that thread, which was talking strictly about recreating
Techdocs. The KB will be something slightly different. Also, many of
the present participants weren't there for that discussion.
> And what does
> that project have to do with the kb? From what I have looked at it
> before, it was a .net based cms software, has the direction of that
> project changed? I'm confused.
Well, according to Gevik it's a tool for building KBs. Whether or not it
meets our requirements, I don't know, since the requirements aren't yet
defined.
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
