The GP is being fair. The link provided is the one exposed on the postgresql.org homepage. The GP was explicit in considering the different projects from the PO

The GP is being fair. The link provided is the one exposed on the postgresql.org homepage. The GP was explicit in considering the different projects from the POV of a new user unfamiliar with them. If the url that you provide is the most appropriate, then that is the url that should be anchored to the 'Documentation' link on the Postgres homepage. I imagine that rethink and Mongo also have point versions. They both choose not to force new users to choose, devoid of context, which point version is most appropriate (sure you can use heuristics, like highest non-experimental point version, but this heuristic sometimes leads to pitfalls, Python and Perl come to mind). And the http://www.postgresql.org/docs/ http://www.postgresql.org/docs/ landing page is made even less necessary since the 'interactive' documentation already has links at the top to other point versions. Throw in a minimal sidebar and you could kill the landing page without losing any of the functionality. Of course, Postgres has been around longer, and their last major website redesign probably pre-dates the entire existence of the other two websites altogether[1], but that has no bearing on which website is the least intimidating to newcomers. If postgres sees fit to make their website less intimidating to newcomers, then their work is cut out for them. [1] Confirmed via Internet Archive's Wayback Machine. The last postgresql.org redisign was complete by early 2006. Mongo and ReThink websites showed up, in minimal form, in late 2008 and early 2009 respectively.