Thread: Overblogging etc
I think its time we put some restrictions on what gets put on the front page of the web site in blogs as well as other things. Since I don't have a blog currently, it makes me slightly more objective in this. Blogs I suggest we allow 1 blog per week per person and that the blogs must be about something constructive, not just a one liner about getting out of the bath or other trivial subjects. Since we have only a few blog slots it's a shame when long useful blogs are replaced by trivial ones. In particular, Devrim's important info about a PostgreSQL RPM repository has been pushed off by 4 blogs from another community member. I don't think we will be able to agree what constitutes trivial, but single sentence blogs should be banned. I wouldn't have a problem with the same subject expanded into a useful multi-paragraph blog, but single sentences give the appearance of triviality. If we don't set a minimum standard for blog content, people will stop reading them *all*. Events ISTM that the criteria for inclusion on the Events page must be that it is publicly accessible and that anyone can attend, upon payment of any fee. I think that probably *is* the case with every event listed, but that should be the clear criteria: no private events and the event message should clearly express that. We should also have a Listings Policy that is available on the website, plus a link and reminder "Does this submission follow the listings policy?" on the event submission screens. Short note to Dave: the code for displaying two company names who are advertising training doesn't exclude duplicates, so you get occasional strange looking sentences mentioning the same company twice. Perhaps the web page should also continue to scroll down the page, so that attempts by people to push information down aren't really feasible any longer. -- Simon Riggs 2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
Simon Riggs wrote: > I think its time we put some restrictions on what gets put on the front > page of the web site in blogs as well as other things. Since I don't > have a blog currently, it makes me slightly more objective in this. Right. So when *will* we see your blog? (Honestly, I do think you would be able to be a very good contribution to planetpostgresql!) > Blogs > > I suggest we allow 1 blog per week per person and that the blogs must be > about something constructive, not just a one liner about getting out of > the bath or other trivial subjects. Since we have only a few blog slots > it's a shame when long useful blogs are replaced by trivial ones. I strongly object to this. We should encourage *more* blogging, not less. > In particular, Devrim's important info about a PostgreSQL RPM repository > has been pushed off by 4 blogs from another community member. The announcement was posted to -announce, that's the important one. Potentially, it should've been posted as news as well. Using planetpostgresql.org in order to get something to the frontpage of postgresql.org as an announcement, is using the wrong tool. And I'm certain Devrim did not post it there for that reason. That said, it's an unfortunate situation with the blog posts right now. But that's *not* because they are from the same person. See below for the reason. > I don't think we will be able to agree what constitutes trivial, but > single sentence blogs should be banned. I wouldn't have a problem with > the same subject expanded into a useful multi-paragraph blog, but single > sentences give the appearance of triviality. If we don't set a minimum > standard for blog content, people will stop reading them *all*. This, I agree with. Devrim, as the ruler of planetpostgresql, do you agree that this would be a good guideline? (Yes, I prefer calling this a guideline rather than "banning blogs") > Events > > ISTM that the criteria for inclusion on the Events page must be that it > is publicly accessible and that anyone can attend, upon payment of any > fee. I think that probably *is* the case with every event listed, but > that should be the clear criteria: no private events and the event > message should clearly express that. There is a page on the wiki about the guidelines. If it's not on there already (no web access ATM), I certainly agree that this should be included. > We should also have a Listings Policy that is available on the website, > plus a link and reminder "Does this submission follow the listings > policy?" on the event submission screens. Yes, the plan is to move the policy from the wiki to the website once it's final. Actually, I think we agreed that it's final, it's just that nobody has moved it there yet. > Short note to Dave: the code for displaying two company names who are > advertising training doesn't exclude duplicates, so you get occasional > strange looking sentences mentioning the same company twice. Seems like a good-ole bug to be fixed :-) > Perhaps the web page should also continue to scroll down the page, so > that attempts by people to push information down aren't really feasible > any longer. Do you honestly think that these are "attempts by people to push information down"? //Magnus
On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 14:24 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > Simon Riggs wrote: > > I think its time we put some restrictions on what gets put on the front > > page of the web site in blogs as well as other things. Since I don't > > have a blog currently, it makes me slightly more objective in this. > > Right. So when *will* we see your blog? (Honestly, I do think you would > be able to be a very good contribution to planetpostgresql!) Thanks very much. To be honest, I've been dissuaded from doing so because the blogs don't stay there long enough to be read by anybody. Or so it seems to me. I'll have a bash next week. > > Blogs > > > > I suggest we allow 1 blog per week per person and that the blogs must be > > about something constructive, not just a one liner about getting out of > > the bath or other trivial subjects. Since we have only a few blog slots > > it's a shame when long useful blogs are replaced by trivial ones. > > I strongly object to this. We should encourage *more* blogging, not less. I agree with more blogging, but I think we must avoid clogging. I've not seen anyone write an interesting blog that comes out almost daily, so I don't think once per week is restrictive on the types of content we really want to see. It can be a guideline. > > I don't think we will be able to agree what constitutes trivial, but > > single sentence blogs should be banned. I wouldn't have a problem with > > the same subject expanded into a useful multi-paragraph blog, but single > > sentences give the appearance of triviality. If we don't set a minimum > > standard for blog content, people will stop reading them *all*. > > This, I agree with. Devrim, as the ruler of planetpostgresql, do you > agree that this would be a good guideline? > (Yes, I prefer calling this a guideline rather than "banning blogs") Sure, "editorial guidelines" are reasonable in any publishing context. > > Perhaps the web page should also continue to scroll down the page, so > > that attempts by people to push information down aren't really feasible > > any longer. > > Do you honestly think that these are "attempts by people to push > information down"? There have been vague accusations from people in the past, not by me, that other people have tried to "stay on top" by people in the past, looking across Events, Training, News and Blogs together. Once that has happened once, on any channel, it forces us to police all of the channels fairly, irrespective of the people involved and without needing to discuss what anybody thinks their motives were or were not. There's no point being strict on one channel and lax on another. So I'm not putting anybody on trial, I'm just looking for ways to avoid the situation altogether and any further discussion on the subject. For now, I think we should de-link some of the multiple blogs that have been posted recently. They all link to the same page and can be read by anybody visiting any one of the links. No problem with what anybody writes on a blog, but that doesn't mean we should allow multiple links to the same pages. If we *don't* do something now, we will be unable to prevent similar occurrences in the future without appearing to be unfair. -- Simon Riggs 2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
Simon Riggs wrote: > > > I suggest we allow 1 blog per week per person and that the blogs must be > > > about something constructive, not just a one liner about getting out of > > > the bath or other trivial subjects. Since we have only a few blog slots > > > it's a shame when long useful blogs are replaced by trivial ones. > > > > I strongly object to this. We should encourage *more* blogging, not less. > > I agree with more blogging, but I think we must avoid clogging. > > I've not seen anyone write an interesting blog that comes out almost > daily, so I don't think once per week is restrictive on the types of > content we really want to see. It can be a guideline. The reason I have so many blog entries is that I just started a Postgres blog and had some pent-up items to post about. As far as long entries, you wil not see them from me. I am usually brief, even in email. And I probably will be pretty frequent. That said, I do feel bad some very signficant blog entries were pushed off the main page by mine. I fact I was surprised at how complex many blog entries were. I did talk to Devrim about appropriate blog content. One idea would to have the Postgres home page list only the most recent blog for each individual, meaning only my most recent entry would appear. So the rule would be the five most recent blog entries, with no blogger duplicated. Blogs basically are for subscribing so you see them all. The list on the home page I think is more for visibility of the blog's presence, rather than to convey a useful way to read the blog entries. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 10:29 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > One idea would to have the Postgres home page list only the most > recent blog for each individual, meaning only my most recent entry > would appear. So the rule would be the five most recent blog entries, > with no blogger duplicated. That seems fair. -- Simon Riggs 2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
> Blogs > > I suggest we allow 1 blog per week per person and that the blogs must be > about something constructive, not just a one liner about getting out of Bah, this is silly. It is a blog listing. If people blog more than others great! > the bath or other trivial subjects. Since we have only a few blog slots > it's a shame when long useful blogs are replaced by trivial ones. > Actually its not because they are blogs. If they are super important then the information can be reposted to lists or even news/events if relevant. > In particular, Devrim's important info about a PostgreSQL RPM repository > has been pushed off by 4 blogs from another community member. > See point above. > > Events > > ISTM that the criteria for inclusion on the Events page must be that it > is publicly accessible and that anyone can attend, upon payment of any > fee. I think that probably *is* the case with every event listed, but > that should be the clear criteria: no private events and the event > message should clearly express that. > I am not sure what you mean here by private event. If it is a private event why is it being advertised? > > We should also have a Listings Policy that is available on the website, > plus a link and reminder "Does this submission follow the listings > policy?" on the event submission screens. This is a good idea. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake
>> Perhaps the web page should also continue to scroll down the page, so >> that attempts by people to push information down aren't really feasible >> any longer. > > Do you honestly think that these are "attempts by people to push > information down"? Yes. However I don't know that there is anything reasonable we can do about it outside the policy. Joshua D. Drake > > //Magnus > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings >
Simon Riggs wrote: > On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 14:24 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> Simon Riggs wrote: > > Thanks very much. To be honest, I've been dissuaded from doing so > because the blogs don't stay there long enough to be read by anybody. Or > so it seems to me. I'll have a bash next week. The #1 link on google for my name... is my blog. You want a blog Simon :) Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake
Magnus Hagander wrote: > >> I don't think we will be able to agree what constitutes trivial, but >> single sentence blogs should be banned. I wouldn't have a problem with >> the same subject expanded into a useful multi-paragraph blog, but single >> sentences give the appearance of triviality. If we don't set a minimum >> standard for blog content, people will stop reading them *all*. > > This, I agree with. Devrim, as the ruler of planetpostgresql, do you > agree that this would be a good guideline? > (Yes, I prefer calling this a guideline rather than "banning blogs") > Devrim has been trying to get people to stop writing single page books in their blogs. You are supposed to write a small teaser then have that teaser take you to the main page of the blog. This is what I and most others do but a few don't. However sometimes one sentence is enough to convey the information. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake
Bruce Momjian wrote: > Simon Riggs wrote: >>>> I suggest we allow 1 blog per week per person and that the blogs must be >>>> about something constructive, not just a one liner about getting out of >>>> the bath or other trivial subjects. Since we have only a few blog slots >>>> it's a shame when long useful blogs are replaced by trivial ones. >>> I strongly object to this. We should encourage *more* blogging, not less. >> I agree with more blogging, but I think we must avoid clogging. >> >> I've not seen anyone write an interesting blog that comes out almost >> daily, so I don't think once per week is restrictive on the types of >> content we really want to see. It can be a guideline. > > The reason I have so many blog entries is that I just started a Postgres > blog and had some pent-up items to post about. My only gripe with your entries Bruce is that there are four blog entries being collapsed into one. I would have preferred it if you had four real blog entries one at a time. > That said, I do feel bad some very signficant blog entries were pushed > off the main page by mine. I fact I was surprised at how complex many > blog entries were. > No you shouldn't feel bad at all. Blogs are whatever you want them to be. You can spout off about religion, dogs, pets, women, politics... whatever. Just make sure you pick your category appropriately so only PostgreSQL content shows up on the front page. > One idea would to have the Postgres home page list only the most recent > blog for each individual, meaning only my most recent entry would > appear. So the rule would be the five most recent blog entries, with no > blogger duplicated. An interesting idea but I don't think it is necessary. > > Blogs basically are for subscribing so you see them all. The list on > the home page I think is more for visibility of the blog's presence, > rather than to convey a useful way to read the blog entries. > Exactly. It is another way to promote our community. It goes along with the mailing lists, events and IRC etc... Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes: > That said, it's an unfortunate situation with the blog posts right now. > But that's *not* because they are from the same person. See below for > the reason. You didn't mention what the reason was? The state of the web front page surprises me, because if you look at http://www.planetpostgresql.org/ Bruce's stuff shows up as a single entry. Why is it not the same way on the front page? regards, tom lane
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Simon Riggs wrote: > >>>> I suggest we allow 1 blog per week per person and that the blogs must be > >>>> about something constructive, not just a one liner about getting out of > >>>> the bath or other trivial subjects. Since we have only a few blog slots > >>>> it's a shame when long useful blogs are replaced by trivial ones. > >>> I strongly object to this. We should encourage *more* blogging, not less. > >> I agree with more blogging, but I think we must avoid clogging. > >> > >> I've not seen anyone write an interesting blog that comes out almost > >> daily, so I don't think once per week is restrictive on the types of > >> content we really want to see. It can be a guideline. > > > > The reason I have so many blog entries is that I just started a Postgres > > blog and had some pent-up items to post about. > > My only gripe with your entries Bruce is that there are four blog > entries being collapsed into one. I would have preferred it if you had > four real blog entries one at a time. Well, it is four different blog entries on my web page and in the RSS feed. I suspect Planet PostgreSQL has some code that collapses multiple entries from the same person on the same day into a single entry. You will notice each title can be clicked on so it knows they are separate. > > That said, I do feel bad some very signficant blog entries were pushed > > off the main page by mine. I fact I was surprised at how complex many > > blog entries were. > > > > No you shouldn't feel bad at all. Blogs are whatever you want them to > be. You can spout off about religion, dogs, pets, women, politics... > whatever. Just make sure you pick your category appropriately so only > PostgreSQL content shows up on the front page. My RSS feed to Planet PostgreSQL is a Postgres-specific blog. > > One idea would to have the Postgres home page list only the most recent > > blog for each individual, meaning only my most recent entry would > > appear. So the rule would be the five most recent blog entries, with no > > blogger duplicated. > > An interesting idea but I don't think it is necessary. Yea, it is possible someone will say two important things in one day; sometimes I do. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
Tom Lane wrote: > Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes: > > That said, it's an unfortunate situation with the blog posts right now. > > But that's *not* because they are from the same person. See below for > > the reason. > > You didn't mention what the reason was? > > The state of the web front page surprises me, because if you look at > http://www.planetpostgresql.org/ > Bruce's stuff shows up as a single entry. Why is it not the same way > on the front page? See my reply to Joshua Drake. I think Planet PostgreSQL has some code that collapses multiple blog entries from the same person on the same day into a single block, which makes sense based on how they format the page with the date in red an a grey banner between people; the Postgres front page doesn't use that formatting. FYI, I would like "Planet PostgreSQL" text on the front page to be clickable to take you to that web site; same with "Events" and "Training" rather than requiring people to click "More". -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
Bruce Momjian wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > FYI, I would like "Planet PostgreSQL" text on the front page to be > clickable to take you to that web site; same with "Events" and > "Training" rather than requiring people to click "More". That seems logical. Joshua D. Drake
On Jan 12, 2008 3:18 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Blogs > > I suggest we allow 1 blog per week per person and that the blogs must be > about something constructive, not just a one liner about getting out of > the bath or other trivial subjects. Since we have only a few blog slots > it's a shame when long useful blogs are replaced by trivial ones. I think that's overly restrictive. I liked the idea of only showing a person's latest blog post on the front page. More blog entries on the Planet site encourages people to subscribe to the RSS feeds so that they don't miss anything. As far as trivial items, I think tagging and communication to each author is the key. My blog is subscribed on Planet with a postgresql tag, so that my volunteering and local Portland content doesn't get mixed in with PostgreSQL stuff. I suggest that authors who write on multiple topics do the same. -selena -- Selena Deckelmann PDXPUG - Portland PostgreSQL Users Group http://pugs.postgresql.org/pdx http://www.chesnok.com/daily
On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 10:25 -0800, Selena Deckelmann wrote: > On Jan 12, 2008 3:18 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > > Blogs > > > > I suggest we allow 1 blog per week per person and that the blogs must be > > about something constructive, not just a one liner about getting out of > > the bath or other trivial subjects. Since we have only a few blog slots > > it's a shame when long useful blogs are replaced by trivial ones. > > I think that's overly restrictive. > > I liked the idea of only showing a person's latest blog post on the front page. You'll see I already agreed to that. -- Simon Riggs 2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
Hi, On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 12:37 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > See my reply to Joshua Drake. I think Planet PostgreSQL has some code > that collapses multiple blog entries from the same person on the same > day into a single block, Check your RSS feed -- they all have the same date, so Planet collapses them into single block. We talked about this with you, IIRC. Regards, -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ , RHCE PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/
Devrim G�ND�Z wrote: -- Start of PGP signed section. > Hi, > > On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 12:37 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > See my reply to Joshua Drake. I think Planet PostgreSQL has some code > > that collapses multiple blog entries from the same person on the same > > day into a single block, > > Check your RSS feed -- they all have the same date, so Planet collapses > them into single block. We talked about this with you, IIRC. Each item has the same date, but different 'guid' and 'link' values. Personally I think the collapsing is fine. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
Hi, On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 11:18 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote: > I suggest we allow 1 blog per week per person I disagree with that. We can't limit/restrict people -- If they feel that they can write good articles/news every day, then they should. This is the 4th year of Planet, and we have really cool articles since Planet PostgreSQL was born. > and that the blogs must be about something constructive, not just a > one liner about getting out of the bath or other trivial subjects. Agreed. That's why we encourage people to add a PostgreSQL specific category to their blogs. Another thing is : Even though I strongly agree with you on the "getting out of the bath" subject, Planet PostgreSQL is not targeted to technical articles only -- If one wants to share something with the PostgreSQL community, which is not directly PostgreSQL related, they she/he is welcome to do so, I think. I did that once when my baby was born. That also could explain why I was unavailable at those times. > Since we have only a few blog slots it's a shame when long useful > blogs are replaced by trivial ones. Please define trivial. > In particular, Devrim's important info about a PostgreSQL RPM > repository has been pushed off by 4 blogs from another community > member. That is an RSS issue -- I did not want to remove Bruce until it gets fixed, because he is a very valuable community member and I'm happy to see his blog at the Planet. > I don't think we will be able to agree what constitutes trivial, but > single sentence blogs should be banned. No "banning", please. We can convince people to avoid posting such blogs, but we cannot ban. It is all about freedom, IMHO. > I wouldn't have a problem with the same subject expanded into a useful > multi-paragraph blog, but single sentences give the appearance of > triviality. If we don't set a minimum standard for blog content, > people will stop reading them *all*. Agreed. Regards, -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ , RHCE PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/
Hi, On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 14:24 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > I think its time we put some restrictions on what gets put on the > front > > page of the web site in blogs as well as other things. Since I don't > > have a blog currently, it makes me slightly more objective in this. > > Right. So when *will* we see your blog? (Honestly, I do think you > would be able to be a very good contribution to planetpostgresql!) +1. Simon, if you need a blogging area (we provide blog space at people.planetpostgresql.org), please drop me an e-mail. Cheers, -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ , RHCE PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/
Hi, On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 11:18 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote: > I suggest we allow 1 blog per week per person and that the blogs must > be about something constructive BTW, there is a "unwritten" policy: We want to avoid 3 consecutive blogs from the same person at the Planet. (Bruce is an exception, because of an issue with the RSS feed). Regards, -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ , RHCE PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/
Hi, On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 10:29 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > One idea would to have the Postgres home page list only the most > recent blog for each individual, meaning only my most recent entry > would appear. So the rule would be the five most recent blog entries, > with no blogger duplicated. The only downside for this could be that if a person blogs more than 1 (non-trivial) consecutive entries, we won't be able to display (at least) one of them on the front page. Regards, -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ , RHCE PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/
> > On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 12:37 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > See my reply to Joshua Drake. I think Planet PostgreSQL has some code > > > that collapses multiple blog entries from the same person on the same > > > day into a single block, > > > > Check your RSS feed -- they all have the same date, so Planet collapses > > them into single block. We talked about this with you, IIRC. > > Each item has the same date, but different 'guid' and 'link' values. > Personally I think the collapsing is fine. Oops, sorry. I forgot I modified my RSS feed so items actually have no dates at all because the subscriber adds their own dates once the RSS items arrives. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Magnus Hagander wrote: > >> >>> I don't think we will be able to agree what constitutes trivial, but >>> single sentence blogs should be banned. I wouldn't have a problem with >>> the same subject expanded into a useful multi-paragraph blog, but single >>> sentences give the appearance of triviality. If we don't set a minimum >>> standard for blog content, people will stop reading them *all*. >> >> This, I agree with. Devrim, as the ruler of planetpostgresql, do you >> agree that this would be a good guideline? >> (Yes, I prefer calling this a guideline rather than "banning blogs") >> > > Devrim has been trying to get people to stop writing single page books > in their blogs. You are supposed to write a small teaser then have that > teaser take you to the main page of the blog. > > This is what I and most others do but a few don't. > > However sometimes one sentence is enough to convey the information. This actually has nothing to dow ith this discussion. Simon complaint is about the case when the *entire* blog post is just one line. What goes on www.postgresql.org is always just the title, which links to the body at the original blog. Not to www.planetpostgresql.org, which is what this effort by Devrim was directed at. //Magnus
Tom Lane wrote: > Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes: >> That said, it's an unfortunate situation with the blog posts right now. >> But that's *not* because they are from the same person. See below for >> the reason. > > You didn't mention what the reason was? Hmm. Should've made that more clear, I guess. The reason, IMHO, is that two of the four blog posts were one-liners with no real content. > The state of the web front page surprises me, because if you look at > http://www.planetpostgresql.org/ > Bruce's stuff shows up as a single entry. Why is it not the same way > on the front page? No, it shows up as multiple entires, just grouped by date ;-) We could do something similar on the frontpage, but it wouldn't change the fact that there are four titles. They'd just look slightly different. //Magnus
Bruce Momjian wrote: > Simon Riggs wrote: >>>> I suggest we allow 1 blog per week per person and that the blogs must be >>>> about something constructive, not just a one liner about getting out of >>>> the bath or other trivial subjects. Since we have only a few blog slots >>>> it's a shame when long useful blogs are replaced by trivial ones. >>> I strongly object to this. We should encourage *more* blogging, not less. >> I agree with more blogging, but I think we must avoid clogging. >> >> I've not seen anyone write an interesting blog that comes out almost >> daily, so I don't think once per week is restrictive on the types of >> content we really want to see. It can be a guideline. > > The reason I have so many blog entries is that I just started a Postgres > blog and had some pent-up items to post about. > > As far as long entries, you wil not see them from me. I am usually > brief, even in email. And I probably will be pretty frequent. There's a difference between brief and one-liners. Brief is fine by me. To look at your blog as an example, the latest two posts are absolute fine - while brief. It's the first two one-liners that seem a bit unnecessary for syndication. > That said, I do feel bad some very signficant blog entries were pushed > off the main page by mine. I fact I was surprised at how complex many > blog entries were. Glad to see you've stumbled upon the great info that can be found in these posts :-) //Magnus
Simon Riggs wrote: > On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 14:24 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> Simon Riggs wrote: >>> I think its time we put some restrictions on what gets put on the front >>> page of the web site in blogs as well as other things. Since I don't >>> have a blog currently, it makes me slightly more objective in this. >> Right. So when *will* we see your blog? (Honestly, I do think you would >> be able to be a very good contribution to planetpostgresql!) > > Thanks very much. To be honest, I've been dissuaded from doing so > because the blogs don't stay there long enough to be read by anybody. Or > so it seems to me. I'll have a bash next week. Don't be. As Bruce said, the vast majority of people will be reading the posts directly off your blog, or off the automatic feed on planetpostgresql.org. *not* off the www.postgresql.org frontpage. That one is really just to make people realize there is a lot of good content produced on planetpostgresql.org that they should subscribe to. So, if you have some content ideas, go for it! I for one will certainly be reading it ;-) >>> Blogs >>> >>> I suggest we allow 1 blog per week per person and that the blogs must be >>> about something constructive, not just a one liner about getting out of >>> the bath or other trivial subjects. Since we have only a few blog slots >>> it's a shame when long useful blogs are replaced by trivial ones. >> I strongly object to this. We should encourage *more* blogging, not less. > > I agree with more blogging, but I think we must avoid clogging. > > I've not seen anyone write an interesting blog that comes out almost > daily, so I don't think once per week is restrictive on the types of > content we really want to see. It can be a guideline. I have. More than once. And certainly people that post more than once a week with very interesting material. Most blogs don't post on a schedule. They post whenever the person feels like it / has time to post. If we say "max 1 per week" that'll just make life harder on them. The solution is t have more people blogging, so this won't happen :-) //Magnus
Bruce Momjian wrote: > FYI, I would like "Planet PostgreSQL" text on the front page to be > clickable to take you to that web site; same with "Events" and > "Training" rather than requiring people to click "More". Done, will be on next site build. //Magnus
On Sat, Jan 12, 2008 at 11:18:54AM +0000, Simon Riggs wrote: > sentences give the appearance of triviality. If we don't set a minimum > standard for blog content, people will stop reading them *all*. It is also entirely possible that if we set a minimum standard for blog content, people will stop reading them (or, more importantly, interesting one-liners will be published elsewhere, and our forum will become a second choice). And no, I have no blog. A
On 12/01/2008, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > Short note to Dave: the code for displaying two company names who are > advertising training doesn't exclude duplicates, so you get occasional > strange looking sentences mentioning the same company twice. Yeah it does exclude them - the events database just had some listed from 'Open Technology Group' and some from 'Open Technology Group, Inc.' I've fixed those - we'll have to keep an eye out for variations in the future. Thanks, Dave
Magus Ha gander wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Simon Riggs wrote: > >>>> I suggest we allow 1 blog per week per person and that the blogs must be > >>>> about something constructive, not just a one liner about getting out of > >>>> the bath or other trivial subjects. Since we have only a few blog slots > >>>> it's a shame when long useful blogs are replaced by trivial ones. > >>> I strongly object to this. We should encourage *more* blogging, not less. > >> I agree with more blogging, but I think we must avoid clogging. > >> > >> I've not seen anyone write an interesting blog that comes out almost > >> daily, so I don't think once per week is restrictive on the types of > >> content we really want to see. It can be a guideline. > > > > The reason I have so many blog entries is that I just started a Postgres > > blog and had some pent-up items to post about. > > > > As far as long entries, you wil not see them from me. I am usually > > brief, even in email. And I probably will be pretty frequent. > > There's a difference between brief and one-liners. Brief is fine by me. > To look at your blog as an example, the latest two posts are absolute > fine - while brief. It's the first two one-liners that seem a bit > unnecessary for syndication. I assume Planet PostgreSQL is for blogging, not for writing technical articles. If every blog posting is going to go through such scrutiny it isn't worth it for me to be on Planet PostgreSQL. Feel free to remove me. The bottom line is that every Planet PostgreSQL blog items takes the same space on the Postgres web site as an event or training course. This significantly raises the bar on what you want to have on Planet PostgreSQL. Obviously a significant number of people are willing to write article-length postings to reach that bar; I am not. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 15:20:47 -0500 (EST) Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > > There's a difference between brief and one-liners. Brief is fine by > > me. To look at your blog as an example, the latest two posts are > > absolute fine - while brief. It's the first two one-liners that > > seem a bit unnecessary for syndication. > > I assume Planet PostgreSQL is for blogging, not for writing technical > articles. If every blog posting is going to go through such scrutiny > it isn't worth it for me to be on Planet PostgreSQL. Feel free to > remove me. Bruce I am not sure why this all came up to be honest and I think the whole thread needs to jump ship. A blog is whatever you make it. Sometimes it contains highly technical information, sometimes it is just general drivel... My take is very simple and I believe Devrim's is too. Use the blog. Enjoy your blog. Ignore everyone else because their critiques are irrelevant. As long as Devrim (as it is his project) is happy with you there, no one has a right to do anything but be quiet. As far as the www.postgresql.org listing is concerned I have yet to see anything you have done or anyone else for that matter (with the except of Hubert which was resolved very quickly and politely) be inappropriate for the page. In short, please enjoy your blog. Everyone else, let's wait until there is actually a problem. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake - -- The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/ Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate SELECT 'Training', 'Consulting' FROM vendor WHERE name = 'CMD' -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHi8cvATb/zqfZUUQRAiXKAJ4xxFiKayD5dikWWRykdHjZkRhssQCdGSM3 7WaKDxi3ZhsWUIdq1F2kw5g= =zIRA -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 15:20:47 -0500 (EST) > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > > > > There's a difference between brief and one-liners. Brief is fine by > > > me. To look at your blog as an example, the latest two posts are > > > absolute fine - while brief. It's the first two one-liners that > > > seem a bit unnecessary for syndication. > > > > I assume Planet PostgreSQL is for blogging, not for writing technical > > articles. If every blog posting is going to go through such scrutiny > > it isn't worth it for me to be on Planet PostgreSQL. Feel free to > > remove me. > > Bruce I am not sure why this all came up to be honest and I think the > whole thread needs to jump ship. A blog is whatever you make it. > Sometimes it contains highly technical information, sometimes it is > just general drivel... > > My take is very simple and I believe Devrim's is too. Use the blog. > Enjoy your blog. Ignore everyone else because their critiques are > irrelevant. As long as Devrim (as it is his project) is happy with you > there, no one has a right to do anything but be quiet. > > As far as the www.postgresql.org listing is concerned I have yet to see > anything you have done or anyone else for that matter (with the except > of Hubert which was resolved very quickly and politely) be > inappropriate for the page. OK, but I do see their point. Having the blog content on the main Postgres web site is trying to have the blog serve two masters with different priorites. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
All, > OK, but I do see their point. Having the blog content on the main > Postgres web site is trying to have the blog serve two masters with > different priorites. I think there's a simple answer to this. Modify PlanetPostgreSQL to have a FrontPage boolean which indicates what gets pulled for the www.postgresql.org homepage, which defaults to False. Then Devrim can check stuff off everyday which is interesting enough for the front page. It's not like it's a huge volume. -- --Josh Josh Berkus PostgreSQL @ Sun San Francisco
Hi, On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 12:47 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote: > Then Devrim can check stuff off everyday which is interesting enough > for the front page. No, I'm strongly against this idea -- Noone is blogging about sex, religion, politics, etc. Every blog is more or less PostgreSQL related -- as I wrote before: It is all about freedom : I don't want to check the validity of the blog content. Every blogger is mature enough and they know what to blog. Regards, -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ , RHCE PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/
Hi, On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 15:20 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > If every blog posting is going to go through such scrutiny it > isn't worth it for me to be on Planet PostgreSQL. Feel free to remove > me. For the records: IIRC, we removed only one blog until now, because that blogger did not want to obey the "avoid advertisements in your blogs" rule. I see no reason to remove your blog. As I told you in our private conversation(s), I'm happy to see you (as a very long time contributor, and a core team member) at the Planet. ...There is no "written" rule, so please don't nag me about this -- yet:) Regards, -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ , RHCE PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/
Devrim, > No, I'm strongly against this idea -- Noone is blogging about sex, > religion, politics, etc. Every blog is more or less PostgreSQL related > -- as I wrote before: It is all about freedom : I don't want to check > the validity of the blog content. Every blogger is mature enough and > they know what to blog. It's not a question about appropriate (although that has happened once), it's a question about lightweight blog entries. For example, I'm about to blog that I moved my photo collection from Flickr to Smugmug. That probably shouldn't be on the PostgreSQL homepage. Hmmm, you know what else is missing from our homepage? Newsfeed from pgFoundry. -- --Josh Josh Berkus PostgreSQL @ Sun San Francisco
Devrim G�ND�Z wrote: -- Start of PGP signed section. > Hi, > > On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 15:20 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > If every blog posting is going to go through such scrutiny it > > isn't worth it for me to be on Planet PostgreSQL. Feel free to remove > > me. > > For the records: IIRC, we removed only one blog until now, because that > blogger did not want to obey the "avoid advertisements in your blogs" > rule. I see no reason to remove your blog. > > As I told you in our private conversation(s), I'm happy to see you (as a > very long time contributor, and a core team member) at the Planet. > > ...There is no "written" rule, so please don't nag me about this -- > yet:) Sounds good. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 15:20 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Magus Ha gander wrote: > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Simon Riggs wrote: > > >>>> I suggest we allow 1 blog per week per person and that the blogs must be > > >>>> about something constructive, not just a one liner about getting out of > > >>>> the bath or other trivial subjects. Since we have only a few blog slots > > >>>> it's a shame when long useful blogs are replaced by trivial ones. > > >>> I strongly object to this. We should encourage *more* blogging, not less. > > >> I agree with more blogging, but I think we must avoid clogging. > > >> > > >> I've not seen anyone write an interesting blog that comes out almost > > >> daily, so I don't think once per week is restrictive on the types of > > >> content we really want to see. It can be a guideline. > > > > > > The reason I have so many blog entries is that I just started a Postgres > > > blog and had some pent-up items to post about. > > > > > > As far as long entries, you wil not see them from me. I am usually > > > brief, even in email. And I probably will be pretty frequent. > > > > There's a difference between brief and one-liners. Brief is fine by me. > > To look at your blog as an example, the latest two posts are absolute > > fine - while brief. It's the first two one-liners that seem a bit > > unnecessary for syndication. > > I assume Planet PostgreSQL is for blogging, not for writing technical > articles. If every blog posting is going to go through such scrutiny it > isn't worth it for me to be on Planet PostgreSQL. Feel free to remove > me. > > The bottom line is that every Planet PostgreSQL blog items takes the > same space on the Postgres web site as an event or training course. > This significantly raises the bar on what you want to have on Planet > PostgreSQL. Obviously a significant number of people are willing to > write article-length postings to reach that bar; I am not. If you had written as much on your blog as you had here, nobody would have said a thing. Nobody has asked for an article, but writing multiple one line blogs in succession is clearly different. That wouldn't be acceptable from Mr.Marketing of Company XYZ, so must include you also. Editorial guidelines apply in all other cases, including for example long debates about whether words have "s" or "z" in them. If anybody posted that they were going to refuse to write docs ever again as a result, they would be considered unreasonable. -- Simon Riggs 2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 12:47:14 -0800 Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: > All, > > > OK, but I do see their point. Having the blog content on the main > > Postgres web site is trying to have the blog serve two masters with > > different priorites. > > I think there's a simple answer to this. Modify PlanetPostgreSQL to > have a FrontPage boolean which indicates what gets pulled for the > www.postgresql.org homepage, which defaults to False. Then Devrim > can check stuff off everyday which is interesting enough for the > front page. It's not like it's a huge volume. Main Entry: ab·surd Listen to the pronunciation of 1absurd Listen to the pronunciation of absurd Pronunciation: \əb-ˈsərd, -ˈzərd\ Function: adjective Etymology: Middle French absurde, from Latin absurdus, from ab- + surdus deaf, stupid Date: 1557 1: ridiculously unreasonable, unsound, or incongruous <an absurd What is the real problem here? That Bruce announced that we were going to have an RC2 and provided the reference link on the archives of why? Sounds like a great blog post to me. Provides short and relevant information with context in 15 words or less. A lot of us could learn quite a bit from that. I would also remind folks that this doesn't really affect www.postgresql.org as it only pulls the title and the title was useful in itself. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake > - -- The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/ Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate SELECT 'Training', 'Consulting' FROM vendor WHERE name = 'CMD' -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHi83QATb/zqfZUUQRAubyAJ9oAiMS3XiCH5PtaZB3VeclzC4AWgCeJQzZ La5t+a+S7SLa9ExP8ZqlH20= =mtUh -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 12:49:42 -0800 Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim@commandprompt.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 12:47 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote: > > Then Devrim can check stuff off everyday which is interesting > > enough for the front page. > > No, I'm strongly against this idea -- Noone is blogging about sex, > religion, politics, etc. Every blog is more or less PostgreSQL related > -- as I wrote before: It is all about freedom : I don't want to check > the validity of the blog content. Every blogger is mature enough and > they know what to blog. Besides don't we already have the category check? E.g; it only shows up if the category is PostgreSQL? > > Regards, - -- The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/ Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate SELECT 'Training', 'Consulting' FROM vendor WHERE name = 'CMD' -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHi83vATb/zqfZUUQRAquWAKCs5rf2nLyXqUo1w+RbiWERCGN58wCaAz3S QxY4eAMGtC1QZnG7S6LvXmo= =7hgu -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On 14/01/2008, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: > Devrim, > > > No, I'm strongly against this idea -- Noone is blogging about sex, > > religion, politics, etc. Every blog is more or less PostgreSQL related > > -- as I wrote before: It is all about freedom : I don't want to check > > the validity of the blog content. Every blogger is mature enough and > > they know what to blog. > > It's not a question about appropriate (although that has happened once), > it's a question about lightweight blog entries. For example, I'm about to > blog that I moved my photo collection from Flickr to Smugmug. That > probably shouldn't be on the PostgreSQL homepage. What, including your food porn? Don't they have rules about that sort of thing on Smugmug? :-p /D
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 12:56:48 -0800 Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: > Devrim, > > > No, I'm strongly against this idea -- Noone is blogging about sex, > > religion, politics, etc. Every blog is more or less PostgreSQL > > related -- as I wrote before: It is all about freedom : I don't > > want to check the validity of the blog content. Every blogger is > > mature enough and they know what to blog. > > It's not a question about appropriate (although that has happened > once), it's a question about lightweight blog entries. For example, > I'm about to blog that I moved my photo collection from Flickr to > Smugmug. That probably shouldn't be on the PostgreSQL homepage. Then don't click the PostgreSQL category... (that is the rule right?) Joshua D. Drake - -- The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/ Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate SELECT 'Training', 'Consulting' FROM vendor WHERE name = 'CMD' -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHi85BATb/zqfZUUQRAgipAJ40qvR4TScwI5iJZpAjEgvJlfqjHACeLPqW kN5cOkz3S4m56IyN03jUpHg= =216y -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Josh Berkus wrote: > All, > >> OK, but I do see their point. Having the blog content on the main >> Postgres web site is trying to have the blog serve two masters with >> different priorites. > > I think there's a simple answer to this. Modify PlanetPostgreSQL to have a > FrontPage boolean which indicates what gets pulled for the > www.postgresql.org homepage, which defaults to False. Then Devrim can > check stuff off everyday which is interesting enough for the front page. > It's not like it's a huge volume. I assume this is a joke. //Magnus
Josh Berkus wrote: > Devrim, > >> No, I'm strongly against this idea -- Noone is blogging about sex, >> religion, politics, etc. Every blog is more or less PostgreSQL related >> -- as I wrote before: It is all about freedom : I don't want to check >> the validity of the blog content. Every blogger is mature enough and >> they know what to blog. > > It's not a question about appropriate (although that has happened once), > it's a question about lightweight blog entries. For example, I'm about to > blog that I moved my photo collection from Flickr to Smugmug. That > probably shouldn't be on the PostgreSQL homepage. > > Hmmm, you know what else is missing from our homepage? Newsfeed from > pgFoundry. You know what's missing from the pgfoundry homepage? RSS feed of the latest news. //Magnus
Simon Riggs wrote: > On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 15:20 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> Magus Ha gander wrote: >>> Bruce Momjian wrote: >>>> Simon Riggs wrote: >>>>>>> I suggest we allow 1 blog per week per person and that the blogs must be >>>>>>> about something constructive, not just a one liner about getting out of >>>>>>> the bath or other trivial subjects. Since we have only a few blog slots >>>>>>> it's a shame when long useful blogs are replaced by trivial ones. >>>>>> I strongly object to this. We should encourage *more* blogging, not less. >>>>> I agree with more blogging, but I think we must avoid clogging. >>>>> >>>>> I've not seen anyone write an interesting blog that comes out almost >>>>> daily, so I don't think once per week is restrictive on the types of >>>>> content we really want to see. It can be a guideline. >>>> The reason I have so many blog entries is that I just started a Postgres >>>> blog and had some pent-up items to post about. >>>> >>>> As far as long entries, you wil not see them from me. I am usually >>>> brief, even in email. And I probably will be pretty frequent. >>> There's a difference between brief and one-liners. Brief is fine by me. >>> To look at your blog as an example, the latest two posts are absolute >>> fine - while brief. It's the first two one-liners that seem a bit >>> unnecessary for syndication. >> I assume Planet PostgreSQL is for blogging, not for writing technical >> articles. If every blog posting is going to go through such scrutiny it >> isn't worth it for me to be on Planet PostgreSQL. Feel free to remove >> me. >> >> The bottom line is that every Planet PostgreSQL blog items takes the >> same space on the Postgres web site as an event or training course. >> This significantly raises the bar on what you want to have on Planet >> PostgreSQL. Obviously a significant number of people are willing to >> write article-length postings to reach that bar; I am not. > > If you had written as much on your blog as you had here, nobody would > have said a thing. Nobody has asked for an article, but writing multiple > one line blogs in succession is clearly different. That wouldn't be > acceptable from Mr.Marketing of Company XYZ, so must include you also. Can't we just say that it's noted, and ask Bruce to try to stay away from the one-liners in his PostgreSQL bog, and just *give it a rest*. *please*? > Editorial guidelines apply in all other cases, including for example > long debates about whether words have "s" or "z" in them. If anybody > posted that they were going to refuse to write docs ever again as a > result, they would be considered unreasonable. Yes, they would be considered unreasonable. But I for one would certainly not question them blogging about it if that's the decision they made. //Magnus
Hi, On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 13:02 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Besides don't we already have the category check? E.g; it only shows > up if the category is PostgreSQL? It depends on the blog software -- some blog softwares may not have that option. Regards, -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ , RHCE PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/
Hi, On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 12:56 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote: > For example, I'm about to blog that I moved my photo collection from > Flickr to Smugmug. That probably shouldn't be on the PostgreSQL > homepage. Depends on what kind of photos you are talking about ;) Regards, -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ , RHCE PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/
All, > > Besides don't we already have the category check? E.g; it only shows > > up if the category is PostgreSQL? Well, you can filter mine by *keyword*. But I don't think anyone is doing that now. -- --Josh Josh Berkus PostgreSQL @ Sun San Francisco
Hi, On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 13:04 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > It's not a question about appropriate (although that has happened > > once), it's a question about lightweight blog entries. For example, > > I'm about to blog that I moved my photo collection from Flickr to > > Smugmug. That probably shouldn't be on the PostgreSQL homepage. > > Then don't click the PostgreSQL category... (that is the rule right?) Josh's blog does not have a category, so we pull the whole feed. Regards, -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ , RHCE PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/
On Jan 14, 2008 1:26 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: > All, > > > > Besides don't we already have the category check? E.g; it only shows > > > up if the category is PostgreSQL? > > Well, you can filter mine by *keyword*. But I don't think anyone is doing > that now. Wordpress provides a category- or tag-specific feed. I gave Devrim the tagged version of my feed. -- Selena Deckelmann PDXPUG - Portland PostgreSQL Users Group http://pugs.postgresql.org/pdx http://www.chesnok.com/daily