Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
>
>> I fully support the use of a wiki for that (a good
>> example is Greg Smith's recent pg/my comparison).
>> I *do not* support the use of a wiki for final
>> publication of anything aimed at end users.
>
> Well, that's a problem - Google doesn't really care where
> on the postgresql.org we stick something, or whether
> it is a wiki or a techdocs or a simple HTML page.
We could always stick a robots.txt in there to make google stay away. Or
perhaps somehow changed the header/footer of the pages?
>> I also have no issue experimenting with permissions to
>> help Josh and the advocacy guys, but I don't think another
>> wiki is required.
>
> It's simple really - I don't think we should allow unmoderated,
> anonymous content on the postgresql.org site. Requiring an email
> address slightly raises the bar, but offers little overall
> protection. The bar right now is a loose web of trust - "Does
> somebody know who this person is? Okay, let them edit the wiki"
> The ad-hoc mechanism for implementing this could be improved,
> of course, but this was an experiment.
Perhaps it just needs to be documented better? As in today if you don't
know who "Greg" and "Neil" are, you don't know how to get permissions..
> A successful one, as it
> turns out: it has shown that having a wiki is an excellent way
> of allowing community collaboration.
Absolutely.
//Magnus
