Re: Managing International Sites

Hi Jonathan, The website for Chinese PostgreSQL community moved to http://www.postgres.cn/ . It was one of three main tools to support our community expansion. The website provides latest release and information about PostgreSQL, latest events in Chinese community, documents and experience sharing, discussion groups, etc. It does help the community a lot. Regards, Daojing Zhou. On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:21 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > Greetings, > > * Jonathan S. Katz (jkatz@postgresql.org) wrote: > > > On Nov 29, 2017, at 2:13 PM, Justin Clift > wrote: > > > On 2017-11-29 18:50, Jonathan S. Katz wrote: > > > > > >> My last point was for “If we do continue to link to the International > > >> sites, we should have guidelines on what content they should contain” > > >> similar to some other guidelines. It seems like the PostgreSQL.fr > > >> and some of the other actively maintained > ones > > >> could serve as a model for setting up those guidelines. Once those > > >> guidelines are published, we can give the international sites a grace > > >> period to follow the guidelines and also have a proper evaluation > > >> process for bringing new sites into the fold. > > > > > > Hmmm, this kind of sounds like us wanting to be control freakish about > > > stuff. > > This is only if people want their websites to be linked from under > PostgreSQL.Org, and it seems entirely reasonable to have appropriate > policies for that. > > > > It doesn't hurt for us to have basic sanity checks (eg is the site > > > still online?, actively updated?, fairly accurate?). > > To be linked under .Org as a formal international part of the project > should definitely require more than just having an online website. My > impression from above with your 'fairly accurate' seems to indicate that > you also think there's more that should be done than just having a > website- this is about defining what 'fairly accurate' means and, > further, what's appropriate content and management of the international > website is. > > > > But be careful of the desire to impose strict *requirements* much past > > > that. Guidelines might be ok, but hard requirements (with no > flexibility) > > > might be more harmful/issue-causing than otherwise. > > I agree that there should be some flexibility, but the guidelines > mentioned up-thread for .fr sound like exactly what we should be doing > and, yes, if the operator of an international PG website decides that > they don't want to follow those guidelines then, at a minimum, we should > remove the link to that website. > > We have 'guidelines' for how the project's name and logo are able to > used too, and it's important that we actually look out for those cases > where the usage isn't proper and address it (which we actively do). > > > Should we go down this path, they would be similar to the community > event / NPO guidelines, which are just that. They impose very few > requirements, more they are a set of recommendations to follow. > > I'm certainly in favor of this and agree that it sounds like the .fr > guidelines would be a good place to start. > > Thanks! > > Stephen >