On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 12:51 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Apr 2008, Brendan Jurd wrote:
>> So, what naming scheme should we go with? I guess I would lean
>> towards "CommitFest YYYY-MM" for easy lexical sorting.
>
> I think the year/month naming idea is fine, at least for as far ahead
> as we can see at the moment. There's no intention of allowing the
> commit fests to slip.
>
The YYYY-MM naming convention seems to have been a success, so while I
was doing some cleanup on the wiki this evening I decided to go ahead
and rename the CommitFest pages by changing the colons to spaces. For
example,
CommitFest:2008-09 => CommitFest 2008-09
In each case, there is a redirect page left behind for those who have
static bookmarks to particular commitfests.
Meanwhile, I've manually resolved double-redirects like the old
CommitFest:{March,May,July} pages and updated all the pages which
reference the commitfest pages directly.
Apart from the orphaned redirects, I don't think we have any pages
left with "CommitFest:" in the name.
Cheers,
BJ