PGDN author workflow proposal

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

PGDN author workflow proposal

Gevik babakhani

Dear All,

 

While the development of the PGDN site advances, I would like to start a discussion about an acceptable workflow process regarding authoring content on the future PGDN.

(And here of course, I must quote Dave: not that we have an “army of technical authors ready to let loose” on the PGDN, but who knows “what dreams may come” :-) )

 

Proposed workflow:

 

- Fact: Only system administrators are able to create/edit/delete the treeview categories.

- Fact: Only the publishers can approve a proposed article.

 

- The “normal” authors are able to write articles based on some template. (tutorial, mini-howto, howto, story, interview, etc, etc)

- After an author is confident about the content and decides that it is ready to be published, then he requests “a version” of the content to be published under a topic/category. (Up until this moment nothing gets into the main treeview where every PGDN visitor can see)

 

- The user with “publisher” permission reviews the content. When he decides that this content is okay (that it is not just another “select * from” article) to be placed inside the main treeview, he then, approves the article.

- after this point the backed PGDN process extracts the article to be places in CVS and treeview and so on.

 

The workflow above will make sure, the PGDN does not become a blog or contain redundant information also ensuring the information that is approved accurate.

Issues to think about: Who gets do decide whether an article is good enough for the PGDN?

 

These are just functional points which I think are very important to spend a moment or two to think about.

Please let me know.

 

PS: please do not worry about content revision and versioning hence this I intent to discussed later.

 

Regards,

Gevik.

 

 

 

 

 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PGDN author workflow proposal

Magnus Hagander
This seems good to me. But there is one hole in the discussion - how is *editing* handled. What I'd like to see in this case is the old verision still being published on the site until a "publiser" approves the edited article, at which point it will replace the one that was on the site already. Can this be done?
 
Also - what does it take to create templates, and who does that? System admins?
 
//Magnus
 


From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Gevik babakhani
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 10:34 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [pgsql-www] PGDN author workflow proposal

Dear All,

 

While the development of the PGDN site advances, I would like to start a discussion about an acceptable workflow process regarding authoring content on the future PGDN.

(And here of course, I must quote Dave: not that we have an “army of technical authors ready to let loose” on the PGDN, but who knows “what dreams may come” :-) )

 

Proposed workflow:

 

- Fact: Only system administrators are able to create/edit/delete the treeview categories.

- Fact: Only the publishers can approve a proposed article.

 

- The “normal” authors are able to write articles based on some template. (tutorial, mini-howto, howto, story, interview, etc, etc)

- After an author is confident about the content and decides that it is ready to be published, then he requests “a version” of the content to be published under a topic/category. (Up until this moment nothing gets into the main treeview where every PGDN visitor can see)

 

- The user with “publisher” permission reviews the content. When he decides that this content is okay (that it is not just another “select * from” article) to be placed inside the main treeview, he then, approves the article.

- after this point the backed PGDN process extracts the article to be places in CVS and treeview and so on.

 

The workflow above will make sure, the PGDN does not become a blog or contain redundant information also ensuring the information that is approved accurate.

Issues to think about: Who gets do decide whether an article is good enough for the PGDN?

 

These are just functional points which I think are very important to spend a moment or two to think about.

Please let me know.

 

PS: please do not worry about content revision and versioning hence this I intent to discussed later.

 

Regards,

Gevik.

 

 

 

 

 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PGDN author workflow proposal

Gevik babakhani

Hi,

 

This seems good to me. But there is one hole in the discussion - how is *editing* handled.

Yes about the editing. This I discuss later if it is okay. I also have a proposal for this.

 

 What I'd like to see in this case is the old verision still being published on the site until a "publiser" approves the edited article, at which point it will replace the one that was on the site already. Can this be done?

 Of course it is also what I am going to propose in the next discussion.

 

Also - what does it take to create templates, and who does that? System admins?

To my opinion there are not that many templates to use. At max ten. I was thinking about:

mini-howto,

howto,

article (like a story or paper) ,

tutorial (like a bigger more organized howto),

a TODO template,

a Did you know template like “Did you know you can inherit tables in PostgreSQL” where it would show howto do that is three maybe four lines.

 

The templates are also a point of discussion for later to decide op on.

 

Regards,

Gevik.

 

 

//Magnus

 

 


From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Gevik babakhani
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 10:34 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [pgsql-www] PGDN author workflow proposal

Dear All,

 

While the development of the PGDN site advances, I would like to start a discussion about an acceptable workflow process regarding authoring content on the future PGDN.

(And here of course, I must quote Dave: not that we have an “army of technical authors ready to let loose” on the PGDN, but who knows “what dreams may come” :-) )

 

Proposed workflow:

 

- Fact: Only system administrators are able to create/edit/delete the treeview categories.

- Fact: Only the publishers can approve a proposed article.

 

- The “normal” authors are able to write articles based on some template. (tutorial, mini-howto, howto, story, interview, etc, etc)

- After an author is confident about the content and decides that it is ready to be published, then he requests “a version” of the content to be published under a topic/category. (Up until this moment nothing gets into the main treeview where every PGDN visitor can see)

 

- The user with “publisher” permission reviews the content. When he decides that this content is okay (that it is not just another “select * from” article) to be placed inside the main treeview, he then, approves the article.

- after this point the backed PGDN process extracts the article to be places in CVS and treeview and so on.

 

The workflow above will make sure, the PGDN does not become a blog or contain redundant information also ensuring the information that is approved accurate.

Issues to think about: Who gets do decide whether an article is good enough for the PGDN?

 

These are just functional points which I think are very important to spend a moment or two to think about.

Please let me know.

 

PS: please do not worry about content revision and versioning hence this I intent to discussed later.

 

Regards,

Gevik.

 

 

 

 

 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PGDN author workflow proposal

Robert Treat
In reply to this post by Gevik babakhani
On Tuesday 28 June 2005 16:33, Gevik babakhani wrote:

> - The "normal" authors are able to write articles based on some template.
> (tutorial, mini-howto, howto, story, interview, etc, etc)
>
> - After an author is confident about the content and decides that it is
> ready to be published, then he requests "a version" of the content to be
> published under a topic/category. (Up until this moment nothing gets into
> the main treeview where every PGDN visitor can see)
>
> - The user with "publisher" permission reviews the content. When he decides
> that this content is okay (that it is not just another "select * from"
> article) to be placed inside the main treeview, he then, approves the
> article.
>
How does one become an author?  Can anyone sign up or do they have to be
created by the publishers? If the later I suspect most of our authors could
just be publishers, I've got faith enough in Josh,Rod,Stephen, etc... that
they can do this stuff correctly.
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PGDN author workflow proposal

Gevik babakhani

Hi,

> How does one become an author?  

The users are can be a member of one or more groups. The groups have
permissions to do stuff.

>Can anyone sign up or do they have to be created by the publishers? If the
later I suspect most of our authors

> could just be publishers, I've got faith enough in Josh,Rod,Stephen etc...
that
> they can do this stuff correctly.

Both are possible. At this moment anyone can signup. But they would not be
able to do anthing as along as an administrator puts them in some group
having more permission, which is standard functionality.

Regards,
Gevik.






---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

               http://archives.postgresql.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PGDN author workflow proposal

Magnus Hagander
In reply to this post by Gevik babakhani
> >Can anyone sign up or do they have to be created by the
> publishers? If
> >the
> later I suspect most of our authors
>
> > could just be publishers, I've got faith enough in
> Josh,Rod,Stephen etc...
> that
> > they can do this stuff correctly.
>
> Both are possible. At this moment anyone can signup. But they
> would not be able to do anthing as along as an administrator
> puts them in some group having more permission, which is
> standard functionality.

I would suggest that anybody should be able to submit stuff, but a
limited number of people (such as the ones listed above, including the
etc) can both submit and approve right away.

The bar should be as low as possible for people to submit stuff. Better
to get stuff that has to be rejected..

//Magnus

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
       choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
       match
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PGDN author workflow proposal

Gevik babakhani
Hi,

I completely agree. We want to gather information and have as much
contributions as possible. We don't want to play as cops. I think this way
We make it interesting and easy for others to contribute and we would keep
our system clean.

> I would suggest that anybody should be able to submit stuff, but a
> limited number of people (such as the ones listed above, including the
> etc) can both submit and approve right away.

This can be done. It is also currently possible.

Gevik.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Magnus Hagander [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 10:22 AM
> To: Gevik babakhani; Robert Treat; [hidden email]
> Subject: RE: [pgsql-www] PGDN author workflow proposal
>
> > >Can anyone sign up or do they have to be created by the
> > publishers? If
> > >the
> > later I suspect most of our authors
> >
> > > could just be publishers, I've got faith enough in
> > Josh,Rod,Stephen etc...
> > that
> > > they can do this stuff correctly.
> >
> > Both are possible. At this moment anyone can signup. But they
> > would not be able to do anthing as along as an administrator
> > puts them in some group having more permission, which is
> > standard functionality.
>
> I would suggest that anybody should be able to submit stuff, but a
> limited number of people (such as the ones listed above, including the
> etc) can both submit and approve right away.
>
> The bar should be as low as possible for people to submit stuff. Better
> to get stuff that has to be rejected..
>
> //Magnus



---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
       subscribe-nomail command to [hidden email] so that your
       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly