Обсуждение: PostgreSQL 7.2 on SlashDot
Hmmm...some good comments, some bad comments, some offensive comments and a lot of FUD from MySQL zealots who don't know any better: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/02/07/0212218&mode=thread Chris
Christopher Kings-Lynne writes:> Hmmm...some good comments, some bad comments, some offensive> comments and a lot of FUDfrom MySQL zealots who don't know any It's a shame the website doesn't have the full info on it - i.e. the 7.2 documentation. Lee.
On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, Lee Kindness wrote: > Christopher Kings-Lynne writes: > > Hmmm...some good comments, some bad comments, some offensive > > comments and a lot of FUD from MySQL zealots who don't know any > > It's a shame the website doesn't have the full info on it - i.e. the > 7.2 documentation. Considering I just got the go-ahead on the docs last nite, they'll be there today. I'd rather the docs were delayed a few days than to put something up that wasn't complete. What's really a shame is that you didn't ASK why it wasn't there! Vince. -- ========================================================================== Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev@michvhf.com http://www.pop4.net 56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo atPop4 Networking Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com ==========================================================================
Vince, Vince Vielhaber writes:> On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, Lee Kindness wrote:> > It's a shame the website doesn't have the full info onit - i.e. the> > 7.2 documentation.> Considering I just got the go-ahead on the docs last nite, they'll be> there today. I'd rather the docs were delayed a few days than to put> something up that wasn't complete.> What's really a shameis that you didn't ASK why it wasn't there! Sorry, I wasn't meaning anything personal! However I'm sure you agree that with a project like PostgreSQL the website is a core aspect. Undoubtedly the postgresql.org mirrors got their highest traffic levels for ages - people looking for 7.2 information and not finding it (well it's there, but in the tarballs). us.postgresql.org certainly had a heavy load - the interactive docs couldn't connect to the database. Perhaps the 7.2 announcement should have been held back until the website was up-to-date? Thanks, Lee.
On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, Lee Kindness wrote: > Vince, > > Vince Vielhaber writes: > > On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, Lee Kindness wrote: > > > It's a shame the website doesn't have the full info on it - i.e. the > > > 7.2 documentation. > > Considering I just got the go-ahead on the docs last nite, they'll be > > there today. I'd rather the docs were delayed a few days than to put > > something up that wasn't complete. > > What's really a shame is that you didn't ASK why it wasn't there! > > Sorry, I wasn't meaning anything personal! However I'm sure you agree > that with a project like PostgreSQL the website is a core aspect. > > Undoubtedly the postgresql.org mirrors got their highest traffic > levels for ages - people looking for 7.2 information and not finding > it (well it's there, but in the tarballs). us.postgresql.org certainly > had a heavy load - the interactive docs couldn't connect to the > database. Just tried it and it worked fine. The interactive docs aren't on the us mirror anyway. The link points back to the main site. But the 7.2 docs won't be available interactively until they're finalized and a note to that effect is under the search box on the idocs site. > Perhaps the 7.2 announcement should have been held back until the > website was up-to-date? not my department. Vince. -- ========================================================================== Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev@michvhf.com http://www.pop4.net 56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo atPop4 Networking Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com ==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber writes: > Considering I just got the go-ahead on the docs last nite, they'll be > there today. I'd rather the docs were delayed a few days than to put > something up that wasn't complete. Vince, the docs were finalized when the release came out. Whatever was in the release tarball is the final documentation. -- Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net
On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Vince Vielhaber writes: > > > Considering I just got the go-ahead on the docs last nite, they'll be > > there today. I'd rather the docs were delayed a few days than to put > > something up that wasn't complete. > > Vince, the docs were finalized when the release came out. Whatever was in > the release tarball is the final documentation. That's what I incorrectly assumed when 7.1 came out. What was released still needed some cleanup. So until I know for a fact that the docs are in good enough shape to be put on the website, they're not put there. Vince. -- ========================================================================== Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev@michvhf.com http://www.pop4.net 56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo atPop4 Networking Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com ==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber <vev@michvhf.com> writes:
>> Vince, the docs were finalized when the release came out. Whatever was in
>> the release tarball is the final documentation.
> That's what I incorrectly assumed when 7.1 came out. What was released
> still needed some cleanup. So until I know for a fact that the docs are
> in good enough shape to be put on the website, they're not put there.
That seems overly strict. Why not put up what you have ASAP? If they
need to be updated later, then replace 'em ... but better to have
not-quite-final docs than no docs.
Or at least put up a link to the development docs saying not-quite-final
docs can be found _over_here_. The problem isn't that there are no docs
available, it's that there's no link in the place that non-developers
would expect to look.
regards, tom lane
On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, Tom Lane wrote: > Vince Vielhaber <vev@michvhf.com> writes: > >> Vince, the docs were finalized when the release came out. Whatever was in > >> the release tarball is the final documentation. > > > That's what I incorrectly assumed when 7.1 came out. What was released > > still needed some cleanup. So until I know for a fact that the docs are > > in good enough shape to be put on the website, they're not put there. > > That seems overly strict. Why not put up what you have ASAP? If they > need to be updated later, then replace 'em ... but better to have > not-quite-final docs than no docs. Well lessee. Until Peter's comment earlier, there has been no mention about the docs being final or even close. There was no doc freeze. The last comments I recall seeing about them at all was in early December. And from that I'm to assume that they're in good enough shape? One thing I learned in the last five years here, never assume anything. But at this point it's irrelevant since I don't intent for it to be my problem when 7.3 is released. > Or at least put up a link to the development docs saying not-quite-final > docs can be found _over_here_. The problem isn't that there are no docs > available, it's that there's no link in the place that non-developers > would expect to look. Now that would be an unrecoverable mistake. Any implications at all that point to the development docs as being release quality will lead people to expect the development docs to always be at release quality which is simply untrue. It will invite linking to them and the problems that are associated with that. Remember? That's one of the reasons I seperated the two sites. Vince. -- ========================================================================== Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev@michvhf.com http://www.pop4.net 56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo atPop4 Networking Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com ==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber <vev@michvhf.com> writes:
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Or at least put up a link to the development docs saying not-quite-final
>> docs can be found _over_here_. The problem isn't that there are no docs
>> available, it's that there's no link in the place that non-developers
>> would expect to look.
> Now that would be an unrecoverable mistake. Any implications at all that
> point to the development docs as being release quality will lead people to
> expect the development docs to always be at release quality which is
> simply untrue. It will invite linking to them and the problems that are
> associated with that. Remember? That's one of the reasons I seperated
> the two sites.
No, no, I'm not suggesting a *permanent* link from the user docs page
over to devel docs. I'm suggesting that during this interval when we
have a release out but no frozen docs, we should have a link from the
user docs page saying "not-quite-frozen docs for 7.2 are over there".
When you install final docs you replace that link with 'em.
If the current devel docs are not pretty damn usable at this stage,
we have big problems ;-). The fact that they may not be quite the final
PDFs or whatever doesn't bother me. The fact that people can't find
them in the place they'd expect to look does bother me.
regards, tom lane