-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160
> We need to set up an Advocacy wiki with more liberal permissions. I've
> been trying to use the developer wiki for that purpose, but it's just not
> set up for people to add themselves so that they can do things like sign
> up for shifts at a booth.
I'm still not sure why we need two wikis - we are a transparent organization,
after all, and we have enough brains to separate the advocacy pages from the
development pages, with Categories if need be. We can also discuss changing
the wiki permission scheme, but opening it up to anyone is generally a bad idea
unless, like Wikipedia, you a) are willing to put up with vandalism and
general subtle mischief and b) have the critical mass of watchers to keep (a)
to a minimum. The experience of the interactive docs indicate that we do
not have that mass yet, and I am reluctant to go that route anyway for
public-facing pages that represent the project via a postgresql.org address.
> So we need a wiki which works the normal way; anyone registered can edit.
Not sure what your definition of normal is; that depends on what you mean by
"registered". If it means just creating an account via web form, that's
harldy an impediment to vandalism. We can certainly give more people the power
to grant write-access to wiki accounts, if that's the perceived hold up.
- --
Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200708040952
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iD8DBQFGtIVWvJuQZxSWSsgRA3UMAJ9oBfw9Poic/8LAgnbYg9/wvqloKgCgz1kk
6QDoA4w+zYfvrycIttwWLjc=
=MWMq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
