Josh Berkus wrote:
> WWW folks,
>
> I've just noticed again today that the way we approve news, events, and
> training for the front page is seriously broken. Currently, if only
> *one* person with approval rights thinks that something is OK, it gets
> approved immediately.
I think that was me this time (I honestly don't recall 100%, but it's
quite possible). Sorry about that.
> This means that screw-ups like this morning happen repeatedly. Namely,
> EDB posted a link-only announcement, which we've discussed before as not
> being acceptable for PostgreSQL. I pinged Robert and asked him not to
> approve it, and phoned EDB's PR agent, and she was giving me new content
> ... when someone else decided to approve it.
Why on earth didn't you email either -www or -slaves about it? It should
be pretty darn obvious that talking to Robert only means talking to
Robert, and not talking to the other people, no?
> We need the news/events system to change in two ways:
>
> 1) There needs to be a way for admins to flag an item as "don't approve,
> there's a problem" so that if one person knows of a reason to hold,
> someone coming online later won't approve due to being clueless.
Ok. That should be fairly easy. How about a text field with "admins
comment", so you can tell people *why*, what's being done, and who's
doing it?
> 2) approvers should wait at least a couple of hours before approving
> things.
As has previously been stated, it had waited for days.
> 3) We need a written policy of what is acceptable for
> news/events/training and what isn't.
>
> I can do (3) but (1) and (2) are up to the other "slaves".
*please* do. I've been asking for this since the first day I started
doing news approvals. While at it, please make one for events as well,
as they're very similar.
We really should have one for doc comments, quotes etc as well, but
those two are the most important ones.
I'll be quite happy to stay away from approving news and/or events until
such a document exists. I would suggest others do as well.
//Magnus
