Re: [DOCS] Re: [HACKERS] Uniform policy for author credits in contrib module documentation?
On Thursday 06 December 2007 03:54, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 10:46:51PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
As of CVS HEAD, some of the contrib module documentation pages have
extensive credit screeds, eg
http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/cube.html
and some just have the author's name, with or without an email link,
and some don't have anything at all.
I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other, except that I think
we should have a uniform policy for all the contrib modules.
Well once we push directly into the core documentation I agree that
outside of release notes (although you just brought that up in another
thread) we don't need to be mentioning contributions like that. Those
who have contributed are in the logs.
Further those who have provided reasonable contribution really should be
mentioned on the contributors page that is up for discussion which would
make the rest of this moot yes?
+1, since they are listed in the release notes when the contrib modules are
added - just like any other piece of code. IMO no reason to treat contrib
differently from any other code in this case.
Hmm, I have often seen that the person listed in the contrib docs was
considered the person to contact if you had questions/comments/patches/etc...
about a specific contrib module. I wonder if people would still get the same
level of help if those names are removed and they have to go to the regular
mailing lists for help (which contrib authors may not follow).
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [DOCS] Re: [HACKERS] Uniform policy for author credits in contrib module documentation?
On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 10:46:51PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote: Tom Lane wrote: As of CVS HEAD, some of the contrib module documentation pages have extensive credit screeds, eg http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/cube.html and some just have the author's name, with or without an email link, and some don't have anything at all. I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other, except that I think we should have a uniform policy for all the contrib modules. Well once we push directly into the core documentation I agree that outside of release notes (although you just brought that up in another thread) we don't need to be mentioning contributions like that. Those who have contributed are in the logs. Further those who have provided reasonable contribution really should be mentioned on the contributors page that is up for discussion which would make the rest of this moot yes? +1, since they are listed in the release notes when the contrib modules are added - just like any other piece of code. IMO no reason to treat contrib differently from any other code in this case. //Magnus ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] Uniform policy for author credits in contrib module documentation?
Josh Berkus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Historically, the only way to troubleshoot some of the contrib modules was to e-mail the author. If people think that we've reached a standard that everything in /contrib is now well-documented and supported by the general community, the I suppose we don't need contact information. I'm not so sure myself. I do not think that we should encourage people to mail the authors first rather than pgsql-bugs. For one thing, a lot of those addresses are dead, and some of the ones that aren't don't respond especially fast. If the community-at-large can't handle a bug, we certainly have enough institutional memory to try to contact the original author, even if that address isn't in the SGML docs. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [HACKERS] Uniform policy for author credits in contrib module documentation?
Tom, If we do want to keep credits in the SGML pages, how extensive should they be? I already took it on myself to remove Gene Selkov's snailmail address, but do we even want email addresses there? A lot of them are probably dead, and the ones that aren't are causing their owners to get extra spam, because an email link is about the easiest thing to scrape from a webpage that there could possibly be. Historically, the only way to troubleshoot some of the contrib modules was to e-mail the author. If people think that we've reached a standard that everything in /contrib is now well-documented and supported by the general community, the I suppose we don't need contact information. I'm not so sure myself. --Josh ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Re: [HACKERS] Uniform policy for author credits in contrib module documentation?
Tom Lane wrote: As of CVS HEAD, some of the contrib module documentation pages have extensive credit screeds, eg http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/cube.html and some just have the author's name, with or without an email link, and some don't have anything at all. I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other, except that I think we should have a uniform policy for all the contrib modules. Well once we push directly into the core documentation I agree that outside of release notes (although you just brought that up in another thread) we don't need to be mentioning contributions like that. Those who have contributed are in the logs. Further those who have provided reasonable contribution really should be mentioned on the contributors page that is up for discussion which would make the rest of this moot yes? Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake Comments? regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [HACKERS] Uniform policy for author credits in contrib module documentation?
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ...Further those who have provided reasonable contribution really should be mentioned on the contributors page that is up for discussion which would make the rest of this moot yes? I don't have any objection to listing people on the contributors page on the strength of their work on contrib modules. But that seems orthogonal to the question of what should be in the SGML docs ... regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [HACKERS] Uniform policy for author credits in contrib module documentation?
Tom Lane wrote: Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ...Further those who have provided reasonable contribution really should be mentioned on the contributors page that is up for discussion which would make the rest of this moot yes? I don't have any objection to listing people on the contributors page on the strength of their work on contrib modules. But that seems orthogonal to the question of what should be in the SGML docs ... All I was saying is I don't think we need the redundancy :). E.g; if they are worthy in the docs, they are worthy on the contributors page and thus not needed in the docs. I am not of a strong opinion either way but it seems having names plastered everywhere just creates more management of information for no particular purpose. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
