> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-www-owner@postgresql.org
> [mailto:pgsql-www-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Joshua D. Drake
> Sent: 02 December 2005 20:57
> To: Robert Treat
> Cc: Josh Berkus; pgsql-www@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] Launching PostgreSQL KB Project Mark 2
>
> > Let me put it this way, I have an interest in discussing
> how the kb will
> > be integrated into the main websites, but not much interest in
> > discussing how exactly its coded up. That said, it sounds
> like what you
> > need to know first is how it will be integrated into the
> site, and that
> > discussion should probably happen here first *before* you go about
> > coding something up and have yourselves painted into a corner.
>
> My suggestion to the other mailing list was to define scope and then
> when we had done so bring it to the WWW list for inclusion/comments
> etc...
>
> > They can't read the archives? You can't bullet-point it for them?
>
> Robert, think ties. Ties don't read archives, nor is it Josh's
> responsibility to bullet-point it for them.
I'd have to disagree with the last point - if Josh is bringing them to
the table, then he should make sure they know what's going on (and I'm
sure he will do whatever is required).
> > Which is why I am confused. Should we discuss the requirements here
> > *first*, and then those interested in coding them up can join the
> > project and discuss the details there?
>
> Well honestly I don't think so. The KB at least at this point has
> requirements that are going to be set forth in a major way by the
> corporate sponsors. I don't think people on the WWW list want to
> particpate in that.
Well as I pointed out yesterday, given that we have discussed the issue
of a techdocs/pgdn/kb in some depth and as far as we were aware Gevik
was already working on it, I think we absolutely do want to know what's
going on and how the project is being redefined. That's exactly why I
strongly suggested to Josh that he needed to raise the topic here.
Incidently, as far as I am concerned the project that had been discussed
was /not/ merely a replacement for techdocs; it was to be a full
knowledgebase type section of the site (styled on Microsoft's KB) with a
CMS style interface for contributors. I will be interested to hear what
will be different about the new KB project.
Regards, Dave.
