I couldn't agree more. The content has been relevant from day one and it's been looking even better ever since. I've passed it in a few lectures already and people really love it already :-)
There was no bug tracker for nginx apart from the mailing lists up until 8 days ago :-) That's a pretty good and important addition for the project to engage with the community in my opinion.
I think it'll be very interesting to see people distributing and replicating CouchApps. This could allow us to potentially skip completely the AppStore and have our own CouchAppStore.
Ok everyone, I've added a basic listing of member organisations but the API seems to be a tad erratic and sometimes doesn't load and some other times does.
Please let me know if something is completely wrong and so I'll revert it.
This is fairly interesting, in the Jan-Feb 2011 edition of "American Scientist" [2] (The magazine) there's an article entitled "A troubled tradition" that outlines a few issues in academia with reviewing papers.
Peer reviewers traditionally have 5 main rules to follow when reviewing papers and one of them is "Fairness" which essentially states: "Avoid biases based on gender, institution affiliation, nationality, and career status."
Interesting to finally have proof that this doesn't only apply to academia but also to "real-life" engineering and that people discriminate no matter what.
Considering that the definition of engineering is: "The discipline dealing with the art or science of applying scientific knowledge to practical problems" — I can't even imagine why one wouldn't have the right to do "engineering" studies.
I digress, my point is made and I'm sad to still see such reaction to well put studies—Assuming it was well put [1]
[1] David M. Cox — PhD: http://bit.ly/hyf5Lj
The aforementioned assumption is made based on the academic knowledge of Dr. Cox and that he would know how to make a study and make an elaborated point explained in details.
[2] American Scientist — Volume 99 — Number 1 — January-February 2011