Re: A user report of misinterpretation of 'unsupported versions'

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Michael Nolan <htfoot@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 4:52 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 5:42 PM, Michael Nolan <htfoot@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> In any case, if we do change the wording, I'd like to lobby again
>> >> for using "obsolete" rather than "unsupported" for EOL versions.
>> >> That seems less likely to be misinterpreted.
>> >
>> >
>> > I suggested the following wording:
>> >
>> > This page is for PostgreSQL version 9.2
>> > For the equivalent page in other versions see:
>> > Currently Supported Versions:  9.1,  9.0,  8.4
>> > Unreleased or Development versions: 9.3, Devel
>> > Older releases that are no longer being maintained: 8.3, 8.2, 8.1, 8.0
>> >
>> > Yes, it is more verbose, but the web is one place where space is not at
>> > a
>> > premium, and this is (IMHO) far clearer for the casual reader.
>>
>> Actually, space "above the fold" *is* at a huge premium on the web.
>
>
> True, but 'how do I get to this page for some other version?' isn't the
> reason someone brings up a page, so it doesn't need to be above the fold.
> Prime space should be used for prime purposes.

The main reason that info line was added was that people arrive from
google quite often to a different version than the one they're using.


>> If we put it at the bottom of the page your argument for space not at
>> a premium would be valid. But we really don't want anything using up
>> more than one row at the top.
>
>
> Why do we need anything at all at the top regarding other versions? It is
> probably desirable to say what version a page is for as part of the overall
> description of what the page is about, and that can probably fit on one
> line.

See above.


>> > A separate issue is, when 9.3 goes live or 8.4 goes EOL, do these pages
>> > automatically get moved to the 'supported' or 'not maintained' sections,
>> > respectively, or do all these pages have to be revised?
>>
>> That is all handled automatically.
>
>
> I suspected as much, but what happens behind the curtain is not always
> obvious (nor does it need to be for 99% of the user community.)  Thanks for
> enlightening me.

Certainly. You can find the full code for how it's actually built on
http://git.postgresql.org/ in the project named "pgweb".

--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/