Re: Missing link in Developer FAQ

On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:50:45PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Alvaro Herrera
>> <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> > Excerpts from Magnus Hagander's message of jue ago 23 06:34:53 -0400 2012:
>> >> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 5:38 PM, Alvaro Herrera
>> >> <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I'm pretty sure that's what we decided when migrating to the new
>> >> website, so it was dropped intentionally. But I can't actually find a
>> >> reference to the discussion.
>> >>
>> >> I think one thing discussed was that the source tree is really a bad
>> >> place to store it. The entire contents, including images, should
>> >> probably be migrated to the wiki instead. *or* to the "website
>> >> proper", but in that case in the actual website SCM, not in the
>> >> postgresql.git one.
>> >
>> > That's what I said four years ago. People weren't excited about that
>> > idea because "there would be no way for it to be in sync with each
>> > different release, only HEAD". I think it's time to let go of that
>> > thought and move it to the wiki or website, where we would (try to)
>> > ensure that it documents the current development version. There doesn't
>> > seem to be any point to keeping multiple versions of it; would-be
>> > developers (the intended audience) are all trying to understand *that*
>> > version, after all, not the previous ones.
>>
>> AFAICT, the last time anybody actually did anything but fix typos in
>> it was in 2008. So I think that "stay in sync" argument is not really
>> relevant.
>>
>>
>> >> Also, it took almost a year for anybody to notice that they weren't
>> >> there, so they're clearly not used very much.
>> >
>> > I think it's not visible enough. We have plenty of new people trying to
>> > understand the PG innards all the time that it remains a useful
>> > resource.
>>
>> Oh, I'm not saying we should get rid of it. Just migrate it to a
>> better position. If we put it "properly on the website" it would
>> probably get *more* exposure, rather than less...
>
> I am ready to work on this. The flowchart has three parts:
>
> 1) the image, with hot clickable areas --- I assume this can't be done
> in a wiki and has to be on our website.

There is an extensoin that let's you do that, but we don't have that
one installed. And I'm not sure we want it to be on there anyway...

> 2) text for clickable links in #1 --- needs either a wiki page for
> every entry or an html 'id' that allows us to scroll to the desired
> entry. This can be done on the wiki. Would be nice to add links to the
> README files in specific directories too.
>
> 3) links from the #2 text to the git source code tree, e.g.
> http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=tree;f=src/backend/commands
>
> Who can help me setup #1 and I can do #2 and #3? I need a web directory
> to hold the image and the ability to edit the HTML to link properly to
> the wiki.

If you can provide the raw HTML, I can do the integration to the web framework.

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/