Re: Tech Docs and Consultants

I read this discussion
I think this is a long term process to get it done.

Why not developing a new portal structure for this?

the postgresql.org is newly developed.
I think there is a new project on gborg which does the further development.

I don't want to reinvent the wheel but if the community has a portal
software based on postgresql
this will help getting this discussion to an end and ther is a CMS for
postgresql that can be used.

only some thoughts
Ewald Geschwinde

Josh Berkus wrote:

>Greg,
>
>
>
>>Call me a traditionalist, but how about the traditional cvs + "your
>>favorite editor" approach? I don't think the techdocs section changes so
>>often that we need fancy wiki / edit-from-the-web-on-the-fly sort of
>>technology here. I also agree with Marc that there is no need to move it
>>elsewhere right now. Let's just keep it simple, focus on the content, and
>>add other things later.
>>
>>
>
>Simple: Because people aren't contributing content because it's too much
>work, both for the contributor and the TechDocs site administrator.
>
>1) The majority of contributors to a Techdocs-style system will not have CVS
>accounts, do not need CVS accounts, and some of them find CVS baffling and
>confusing besides.
> If someone e-mails you an article and you tell them, "Oh, this is very good,
>why don't you sign up for a CVS account, just follow this 14-step guide and
>wait 8 days for authorization," do you think that that article will get
>posted?
>
>2) Raw HTML editing of a decent length article takes as long as writing the
>article itself, and I have yet to see a WYSWYG HTML editor which produced
>output that could be cleanly incorporated into a CSS site framework without
>extensive hand-tweaking.
> The result of this is one of 3 things:
> a) Some writers (like me) only contribute 1/2 as many articles because we
>spend too much time tweaking our HTML.
> b) Some writers contribute their articles to the admin as plain text, then
>forcing the admin to spend 10 hours per week formatting articles for posting.
> c) Some writers get discouraged by the long delay in posting, and give up on
>contributing.
>
>3) Except for the Guides pages, the tech for which is unfinished, the
>structure of Techdocs does not allow multi-user collaboration or comments.
>
>I *am* focusing on content, Greg. I want the focus of TechDocs to be
>content, and for the technology (including CVS and HTML markup) to be
>virtually invisible and take care of itself. The ONLY way to maximize
>contributions is to make them as easy as possible to make.
>
>Lord-on-a-pogo-stick, no wonder MySQL AB is beating our pants off in
>community-building. MySQL.com doesn't require that a user have Stunnel, CVS,
>and intermediate HTML skills before they can contribute even a paragraph to
>the site! Justin has been trying to change this, and I want to finish that
>change.
>
>BTW, all of the above really goes for the advocacy site as well, except the
>part about comments.
>
>
>