Обсуждение: Wiki editor request
What is the long-term plan to give users write access to the wiki. Is having requesters post to this list for everyone to see really our best option? -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
On 06/09/2016 09:42 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > What is the long-term plan to give users write access to the wiki. Is > having requesters post to this list for everyone to see really our best > option? we are open to better suggestions - but so far there have been no real workable other solutions presented. Stefan
On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 09:44:56PM +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: > On 06/09/2016 09:42 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > What is the long-term plan to give users write access to the wiki. Is > > having requesters post to this list for everyone to see really our best > > option? > > we are open to better suggestions - but so far there have been no real > workable other solutions presented. Why would we not just create a list of people who can grant access, rather than posting to a public list? -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
On 06/09/2016 09:49 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 09:44:56PM +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: >> On 06/09/2016 09:42 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: >>> What is the long-term plan to give users write access to the wiki. Is >>> having requesters post to this list for everyone to see really our best >>> option? >> >> we are open to better suggestions - but so far there have been no real >> workable other solutions presented. > > Why would we not just create a list of people who can grant access, > rather than posting to a public list? because all the people how can grant access are already on this list and they are tracking the list for other reasons anyway - if we just put up a list of people and people start mailing those indidually would not really scale imho - and I dont think it is worth creating just-another-list either. Stefan
On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 09:52:13PM +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: > On 06/09/2016 09:49 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Why would we not just create a list of people who can grant access, > > rather than posting to a public list? > > because all the people how can grant access are already on this list and > they are tracking the list for other reasons anyway - if we just put up > a list of people and people start mailing those indidually would not > really scale imho - and I dont think it is worth creating > just-another-list either. Well, what percentage of readers of www do not grant wiki permissions? I would guess it is +90%, meaning 90% of www subscribers are reading emails in which they have no interest, and 90% of traffic on this list is now the request for wiki permissions --- so that makes 180%. ;-) If you would like me to unsubscribe because this list is now mostly for the requesting of wiki permissions, I can do that. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
On 06/09/2016 10:03 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 09:52:13PM +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: >> On 06/09/2016 09:49 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: >>> Why would we not just create a list of people who can grant access, >>> rather than posting to a public list? >> >> because all the people how can grant access are already on this list and >> they are tracking the list for other reasons anyway - if we just put up >> a list of people and people start mailing those indidually would not >> really scale imho - and I dont think it is worth creating >> just-another-list either. > > Well, what percentage of readers of www do not grant wiki permissions? > I would guess it is +90%, meaning 90% of www subscribers are reading > emails in which they have no interest, and 90% of traffic on this list > is now the request for wiki permissions --- so that makes 180%. ;-) not sure I believe in that math... > > If you would like me to unsubscribe because this list is now mostly for > the requesting of wiki permissions, I can do that. well - sorry for that but please understand that granting permissions that way is not fun for us either and it would be an additional burden for use to track yet-another-list, but if that is what people think we need to do... Stefan
On 06/09/2016 01:07 PM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: > On 06/09/2016 10:03 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 09:52:13PM +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: >>> On 06/09/2016 09:49 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: >>>> Why would we not just create a list of people who can grant access, >>>> rather than posting to a public list? >>> >>> because all the people how can grant access are already on this list and >>> they are tracking the list for other reasons anyway - if we just put up >>> a list of people and people start mailing those indidually would not >>> really scale imho - and I dont think it is worth creating >>> just-another-list either. >> >> Well, what percentage of readers of www do not grant wiki permissions? >> I would guess it is +90%, meaning 90% of www subscribers are reading >> emails in which they have no interest, and 90% of traffic on this list >> is now the request for wiki permissions --- so that makes 180%. ;-) > > not sure I believe in that math... > Since April 1st I have received over 69 messages in regards to adding or modifying users for the wiki. I have received 336 messages to the list. So about 20% of the traffic on this list is editor requests. >> >> If you would like me to unsubscribe because this list is now mostly for >> the requesting of wiki permissions, I can do that. > > well - sorry for that but please understand that granting permissions > that way is not fun for us either and it would be an additional burden > for use to track yet-another-list, but if that is what people think we > need to do... Yeah it sucks all around, we are resource constrained. It seems what should happen is something like: * If you have a community account, login and select "request wiki editor privs" * If you don't have a community account, create one and select "request wiki editor privs" Then have a script that automatically does it once every 24 hours based on N criteria. But again, we are resource constrained. Bruce, would you be willing to help implement some of this? JD -- Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/ +1-503-667-4564 PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development. Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 01:21:24PM -0700, Joshua Drake wrote: > >>Well, what percentage of readers of www do not grant wiki permissions? > >>I would guess it is +90%, meaning 90% of www subscribers are reading > >>emails in which they have no interest, and 90% of traffic on this list > >>is now the request for wiki permissions --- so that makes 180%. ;-) > > > >not sure I believe in that math... > > > > Since April 1st I have received over 69 messages in regards to adding or > modifying users for the wiki. I have received 336 messages to the list. So > about 20% of the traffic on this list is editor requests. I checked from February to today and saw 48%, so not 90% as I guessed. > >>If you would like me to unsubscribe because this list is now mostly for > >>the requesting of wiki permissions, I can do that. > > > >well - sorry for that but please understand that granting permissions > >that way is not fun for us either and it would be an additional burden > >for use to track yet-another-list, but if that is what people think we > >need to do... > > Yeah it sucks all around, we are resource constrained. It seems what should > happen is something like: > > * If you have a community account, login and select "request wiki editor > privs" > > * If you don't have a community account, create one and select "request wiki > editor privs" > > Then have a script that automatically does it once every 24 hours based on N > criteria. > > But again, we are resource constrained. Bruce, would you be willing to help > implement some of this? No, I would be more likely to create a procmail rule to discard those emails. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc> wrote: > On 06/09/2016 10:03 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> Well, what percentage of readers of www do not grant wiki permissions? >> I would guess it is +90%, meaning 90% of www subscribers are reading >> emails in which they have no interest, and 90% of traffic on this list >> is now the request for wiki permissions --- so that makes 180%. ;-) > > not sure I believe in that math... 248 list subscribers; 17 permissions emails so far in June. At that rate, roughly, roughly 14,000 reads of such emails by non-grantors per month. Multiply by the time you figure it takes to blow through each to get wasted person-hours per month with the current approach. -- Kevin Grittner EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On 06/09/2016 10:23 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner > <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc> wrote: >> On 06/09/2016 10:03 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > >>> Well, what percentage of readers of www do not grant wiki permissions? >>> I would guess it is +90%, meaning 90% of www subscribers are reading >>> emails in which they have no interest, and 90% of traffic on this list >>> is now the request for wiki permissions --- so that makes 180%. ;-) >> >> not sure I believe in that math... > > 248 list subscribers; 17 permissions emails so far in June. > > At that rate, roughly, roughly 14,000 reads of such emails by > non-grantors per month. Multiply by the time you figure it takes > to blow through each to get wasted person-hours per month with the > current approach. well - as said before, we are very open to better ways to do this but just putting more burden on the people who can grant access by having to read even more lists is not a very good tradeoff for me. The pgsql-www@ charter is regarding development and organisation of the postgresql websites (which the wiki is clearly part of imho), if granting access to a previously heavily abused website which very high visibility in the community does not fit under "organisation" I'm not sure what else does... Stefan
On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 10:32:30PM +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: > > At that rate, roughly, roughly 14,000 reads of such emails by > > non-grantors per month. Multiply by the time you figure it takes > > to blow through each to get wasted person-hours per month with the > > current approach. > > well - as said before, we are very open to better ways to do this but > just putting more burden on the people who can grant access by having to The burden is what? Having privilege grantors subscribe to another email list? What other burdens are there? > read even more lists is not a very good tradeoff for me. The pgsql-www@ > charter is regarding development and organization of the postgresql > websites (which the wiki is clearly part of imho), > if granting access to a previously heavily abused website which very > high visibility in the community does not fit under "organisation" I'm > not sure what else does... Well, I think the big question is whether a significant percentage of people subscribed to the www list _potentially_ have any ability to offer feedback to the requests. I think the problem is that I can _potentially_ comment on 50% of the postings, and can't for the wiki access requests. I can't think of another community email list like that. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
On 06/09/2016 01:32 PM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: > well - as said before, we are very open to better ways to do this but > just putting more burden on the people who can grant access by having to > read even more lists is not a very good tradeoff for me. The pgsql-www@ > charter is regarding development and organisation of the postgresql > websites (which the wiki is clearly part of imho), > if granting access to a previously heavily abused website which very > high visibility in the community does not fit under "organisation" I'm > not sure what else does... I was thinking a Django widget would be the way to go, but since I'm not volunteering to write one, I haven't spoken up before. FWIW, I get so much email from -www and -slaves already that frankly a few dozen wiki edit requests is lost in the noise. -- -- Josh Berkus Red Hat OSAS (any opinions are my own)
> On 9 Jun 2016, at 22:38, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 10:32:30PM +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: >>> At that rate, roughly, roughly 14,000 reads of such emails by >>> non-grantors per month. Multiply by the time you figure it takes >>> to blow through each to get wasted person-hours per month with the >>> current approach. >> >> well - as said before, we are very open to better ways to do this but >> just putting more burden on the people who can grant access by having to > > The burden is what? Having privilege grantors subscribe to another > email list? What other burdens are there? No, managing and likely moderation of every single request to the list. > >> read even more lists is not a very good tradeoff for me. The pgsql-www@ >> charter is regarding development and organization of the postgresql >> websites (which the wiki is clearly part of imho), >> if granting access to a previously heavily abused website which very >> high visibility in the community does not fit under "organisation" I'm >> not sure what else does... > > Well, I think the big question is whether a significant percentage of > people subscribed to the www list _potentially_ have any ability to > offer feedback to the requests. I think the problem is that I can > _potentially_ comment on 50% of the postings, and can't for the wiki > access requests. I can't think of another community email list like > that. > > -- > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us > EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com > > + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + > + Ancient Roman grave inscription + > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-www mailing list (pgsql-www@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-www
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 10:32:30PM +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
>> well - as said before, we are very open to better ways to do this but
>> just putting more burden on the people who can grant access by having to
> The burden is what? Having privilege grantors subscribe to another
> email list? What other burdens are there?
AFAIK, pgsql-www exists for the convenience of the web team, ie pginfra.
If they choose to define its scope as including edit-privilege requests,
it's not for you to complain about that. Unsubscribe if you don't want
to read such stuff.
In any case, one would hope that the rate of new requests will drop off
over time, so that this isn't going to be a big problem indefinitely.
regards, tom lane
On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 08:24:00PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > > On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 10:32:30PM +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: > >> well - as said before, we are very open to better ways to do this but > >> just putting more burden on the people who can grant access by having to > > > The burden is what? Having privilege grantors subscribe to another > > email list? What other burdens are there? > > AFAIK, pgsql-www exists for the convenience of the web team, ie pginfra. > If they choose to define its scope as including edit-privilege requests, > it's not for you to complain about that. Unsubscribe if you don't want > to read such stuff. Well if the www list is for making web site requests, and not for web site discussion, it makes sense for wiki requests to go there. Can someone add a "subject" to the mailto: URL used for the wiki email request: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/WikiEditing Change: [mailto:pgsql-www@postgresql.org PostgreSQL -www Mailinglist] to: [mailto:pgsql-www@postgresql.org?subject=Wiki%20edit%20request PostgreSQL -www Mailinglist] I don't know how to create a patch for the wiki site, and I don't have wiki edit permissions for that page. Thanks. This will at least make most of the request subjects look the same. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
On 06/10/2016 11:30 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 08:24:00PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: >>> On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 10:32:30PM +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: >>>> well - as said before, we are very open to better ways to do this but >>>> just putting more burden on the people who can grant access by having to >> >>> The burden is what? Having privilege grantors subscribe to another >>> email list? What other burdens are there? >> >> AFAIK, pgsql-www exists for the convenience of the web team, ie pginfra. >> If they choose to define its scope as including edit-privilege requests, >> it's not for you to complain about that. Unsubscribe if you don't want >> to read such stuff. > > Well if the www list is for making web site requests, and not for web > site discussion, it makes sense for wiki requests to go there. well - asking for access to the wiki is kinda a discussion (or could potentially result in one) ;) > > Can someone add a "subject" to the mailto: URL used for the wiki email > request: > > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/WikiEditing > > Change: > > [mailto:pgsql-www@postgresql.org PostgreSQL -www Mailinglist] > > to: > > [mailto:pgsql-www@postgresql.org?subject=Wiki%20edit%20request PostgreSQL -www Mailinglist] > > I don't know how to create a patch for the wiki site, and I don't have > wiki edit permissions for that page. Thanks. This will at least make > most of the request subjects look the same. good suggestion & done. If you want to provide patches to the main website you can always look at the git repo: https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=pgweb.git;a=summary which also has a docs/ subdirectory :) Stefan
On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 04:18:37PM +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: > On 06/10/2016 11:30 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 08:24:00PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > >>> On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 10:32:30PM +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: > >>>> well - as said before, we are very open to better ways to do this but > >>>> just putting more burden on the people who can grant access by having to > >> > >>> The burden is what? Having privilege grantors subscribe to another > >>> email list? What other burdens are there? > >> > >> AFAIK, pgsql-www exists for the convenience of the web team, ie pginfra. > >> If they choose to define its scope as including edit-privilege requests, > >> it's not for you to complain about that. Unsubscribe if you don't want > >> to read such stuff. > > > > Well if the www list is for making web site requests, and not for web > > site discussion, it makes sense for wiki requests to go there. > > well - asking for access to the wiki is kinda a discussion (or could > potentially result in one) ;) Yes, true. > > Can someone add a "subject" to the mailto: URL used for the wiki email > > request: > > > > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/WikiEditing > > > > Change: > > > > [mailto:pgsql-www@postgresql.org PostgreSQL -www Mailinglist] > > > > to: > > > > [mailto:pgsql-www@postgresql.org?subject=Wiki%20edit%20request PostgreSQL -www Mailinglist] > > > > I don't know how to create a patch for the wiki site, and I don't have > > wiki edit permissions for that page. Thanks. This will at least make > > most of the request subjects look the same. > > good suggestion & done. If you want to provide patches to the main Thanks. I think the consistent subject text will help me separate the edit requests from other email volume on that list. > website you can always look at the git repo: > > https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=pgweb.git;a=summary which also has > a docs/ subdirectory :) Yes, I have that git tree. I assume the wiki isn't in there though. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 11:29:02AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Thanks. I think the consistent subject text will help me separate the > edit requests from other email volume on that list. Also, the wiki says: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/WikiEditingIf you just created a new community account or if your current accountused tohave "editor" privileges, you can ask on either the PostgreSQL-www Mailinglist or the PostgreSQL IRC Channel (direct yourrequest to -----------'pginfra', multiple individuals in the channel highlight on thatstring)for "editor" privileges. Are wiki edit requests made to the IRC channel actually honored? I heard they are not, and if they are not, this part of the text should be removed. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
On 06/12/2016 02:48 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 11:29:02AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> Thanks. I think the consistent subject text will help me separate the >> edit requests from other email volume on that list. > > Also, the wiki says: > > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/WikiEditing > > If you just created a new community account or if your current account > used to have "editor" privileges, you can ask on either the PostgreSQL > -www Mailinglist or the PostgreSQL IRC Channel (direct your request to > ----------- > 'pginfra', multiple individuals in the channel highlight on that string) > for "editor" privileges. > > Are wiki edit requests made to the IRC channel actually honored? I > heard they are not, and if they are not, this part of the text should be > removed. they are honored, but there are fewer people on IRC than reading the lists who can approve the requests so it might take longer for somebody to respond. Stefan
On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 3:48 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 11:29:02AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Thanks. I think the consistent subject text will help me separate the
> edit requests from other email volume on that list.
Also, the wiki says:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/WikiEditing
If you just created a new community account or if your current account
used to have "editor" privileges, you can ask on either the PostgreSQL
-www Mailinglist or the PostgreSQL IRC Channel (direct your request to
-----------
'pginfra', multiple individuals in the channel highlight on that string)
for "editor" privileges.
Are wiki edit requests made to the IRC channel actually honored? I
heard they are not, and if they are not, this part of the text should be
removed.
FYI: wanted to edit conferences list https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/WikiEditing to add PgDay.ru but found that my account (nikolay) has not yet proper rights.
I'm sure that rights should be given by default. But the problem of spam for MediaWiki engine is high -- some time ago I gave up and had to shutdown Postgres wiki in Russian due to this problem. As for IRC, this way of communication will get less and less popularity, since it's really outdated (being mac/ios user it's really hard to simply enter it; and it doesn't work in browser at all) and due to increasing popularity of new types of messengers.
Crazy idea: maybe to build a chatbot (for Telegram and/or Facebook messenger) that would grant permissions in semi-automated way and also would notify about wiki changes, etc? :-)
Anyway, somebody, please add right for my accout (User:Nikolay). Thanks.
Nikolay Samokhvalov wrote: > FYI: wanted to edit conferences list > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/WikiEditing to add PgDay.ru but found that > my account (nikolay) has not yet proper rights. You're an editor now. > I'm sure that rights should be given by default. But the problem of spam > for MediaWiki engine is high -- some time ago I gave up and had to shutdown > Postgres wiki in Russian due to this problem. Exactly. > Crazy idea: maybe to build a chatbot (for Telegram and/or Facebook > messenger) that would grant permissions in semi-automated way and also > would notify about wiki changes, etc? :-) Spammers successfully overcame all automated antispam measures that were set up, so I'm sure they would be able to game a chatbot too. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services