| From: | "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, pgsql-advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: When should be advocate external projects? |
| Date: | 2016-05-13 06:38:27 |
| Message-ID: | 0A3221C70F24FB45833433255569204D1F5742E8@G01JPEXMBYT05 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
> From: pgsql-advocacy-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 02:15:15PM -0700, Joshua Drake wrote:
> > IMO:
> >
> > A much better solution is to rework the software catalogue to properly
> > highly open source "projects" versus "products" and allow people to
> > manage via a moderated interface their own listings. It will be
> > consistent, provide a central place within the primary domain and be lower
> overhead than a wiki.
>
> The nice thing about a wiki is anyone can go in and improve it.
I'm not sure yet whether the current Software Catalog style or wiki is better, but can't we get both benefits?
* Take the wiki style, which allows everyone to edit.
* Place the link to the wiki page on the main web site. (The current location of the Software Catalog is not easy to find.)
* To make the software entries look consistent, specify the entry format in the editing guideline page.
Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Darren Duncan | 2016-05-13 06:55:15 | Re: New versioning scheme |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2016-05-13 05:58:33 | Re: New versioning scheme |