On Fri, 2004-11-05 at 05:26, Mike Cox wrote:
> Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>
> > I saw a post indicating a request for discussion on the creation of an
> > official big 8 newsgroup comp.databases.postgresql.general. According to
> > the notice this newsgroup already exists in google groups and is actively
> > being used. The discussion will be in news.groups.
>
> Actually, the group does exist and is spread out on some servers across the
> world. Google carries it as you mentioned, as does netfront.net.
>
> The problem is that the postgresql groups have not gone through the offical
> process that is required in order to be a comp.* group. Because of this
> many servers consider the groups "bogus" and refuse to carry them. Having
> a rogue "comp" group is considered bad, and the correct thing is either be
> under an alt, such as alt.databases.postgresql.general OR go through the
> official process of becoming a member of the comp.* hierarchy.
>
> The process of going under the comp hierarchy is simple in that a Request
> for Discussion is filed (RFD), and then 21 days later a call for votes
> (CFV) is issued. That is where everyone here should vote for postgresql to
> be a member of the "big 8".
>
Will you post the CFV link on GENERAL (and here) when it comes out?
That will help us all pitch in.
--
Best Regards, Simon Riggs
