On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 04:11:31PM +0100, Cédric Villemain wrote:
> I don't know exactly about rules but I am happy to read
> planet.postgresql with the current contents (so the rules looks good
> so far)
> I won't if its to read about internals of close-source products or
> derivate work from close-source product where removing the name of the
> close-source thing is going to remove the interest of the article for
> PostgreSQL and derivate open-source toools and projects.
> Also I am not interested in content I won't be able to use because of
> licence restriction. (not off-topic I believe)
>
> Maybe the next time someone got a post refused he/she can be asked if
> he agrees to be used to debate the rules change...
While I agree with you, I should point out that it is unclear what we
are _not_ seeing on Planet Postgres which could also be of interest.
I think the other comment wanting to see an example of what we are
missing might be the only way we can figure this out.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
