Re: Launching PostgreSQL KB Project Mark 2
От | Dave Page |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Launching PostgreSQL KB Project Mark 2 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E4E7E61F@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Launching PostgreSQL KB Project Mark 2 (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Launching PostgreSQL KB Project Mark 2
|
Список | pgsql-www |
> -----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.
В списке pgsql-www по дате отправления: