Re: [pgsql-www] Fix for PG History web page

On 01/01/2016 09:45 AM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
> On 01/01/2016 06:41 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
>> On 01/01/2016 06:47 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner
>>> <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc <mailto:stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>> wrote:
>>>
>>> moving to -advocacy because I think it better belongs there from a
>>> discussion pov
>>>
>>> On 12/23/2015 05:50 AM, Oleg Bartunov wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 2:18 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us
>>> <mailto:bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
>>> > <mailto:bruce(at)momjian(dot)us <mailto:bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Our PG history web pages says talks about Postgres 8.0, which
>>> seems kind
>>> > of old at this point:
>>> >
>>> > http://www.postgresql.org/about/history/
>>> >
>>> > Today, PostgreSQL's user base is larger than ever and
>>> includes a
>>> > sizeable group of large corporations who use it in
>>> demanding
>>> > environments. Some of these companies such as
>>> Afilias and
>>> > Fujitsu have
>>> > made significant contributions to PostgreSQL's
>>> development.
>>> > And, true to
>>> > its roots, it continues to improve in both
>>> sophistication and
>>> > performance, now more than ever. Version 8.0 is
>>> PostgreSQL's
>>> > long
>>> > ---
>>> > awaited debut into the enterprise database market,
>>> bringing
>>> > features
>>> > such as tablespaces, Java stored procedures, point in
>>> time
>>> > recovery, and
>>> > nested transactions (savepoints). With it came a long
>>> > awaited feature
>>> > --- a native Windows port.
>>> >
>>> > Can someone update this? Can I submit a patch?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > I always think, that our history page is very outdated and
>>> requires more
>>> > addition than you proposed. I have nothing against mentioning
>>> Afilias
>>> > and Fujtsu, but then why we didn't acknowledged other companies ?
>>> Also,
>>> > I think, better to discuss such things in -advocacy mailing list.
>>> >
>>> > btw, I think we missed great Elein posts
>>> >
>>>
>>> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20041203184254.F6767@cookie.varlena.com
>>>
>>>
>>> In light of the upcoming 9.5 release it would be awfully nice if
>>> somebody could work on updating /about:
>>>
>>> * The "History" page is very outdated and clearly needs some love
>>> * the "Awards" page is something we should imho remove completely
>>> (clearly awards are something people care less and less about
>>> given our
>>> maturity and seeing the most "recent" award on our website being from
>>> 2008 is imho actually very bad for our advocacy
>>> * The case studies are very outdated and in a fair amount of cases
>>> confusing - I think we should also remove them given nobody seem
>>> to have
>>> the time and enthusiasm to keep them at least somewhat current,
>>> same for
>>> the "featured users" list (most recent entry there seems to be from
>>> ~2006 and some places dont even exist any more)
>>>
>>>
>>> These things are all on the TODO list of the folks who offered to work
>>> on the website redesign. As I'm sure Bruce is very well aware, since was
>>> present in the meeting that they did. However, per the result of that
>>> discussion, *their* focus is to work on the design first and the content
>>> later.
>>>
>>> However, that of course doesn't prevent *others* from working on the
>>> actual content. Patches are always welcome, and as those are all static
>>> pages they shouldn't break any of the redesign work.
>>
>> Where is the entry point for doing patches?
>>
>> Or is there some link that describes at least in outline form a
>> procedure for working on the Web site content?
>
> http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=pgweb.git;a=summary
>
> and more specificially:
>
> http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=pgweb.git;a=tree;f=docs;hb=HEAD

Thanks.

>
>
>
> Stefan
>

--
Adrian Klaver
adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com