On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 19:48:16 +0000
Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> > Right, I believe that is a valid argument. I think the real
> > problem is that as a community we are not diligent in pushing
> > people to the contextually specific lists we already have.
> I would junk pgsql-sql, pgsql-ports, pgsql-performance, pgsql-novice
> and redirect them all to pgsql-general and pgsql-docs,
> pgsql-interfaces, and pgsql-bugs and send them all to -hackers.
I could see ports going to hackers but bugs should be a bug tracker
that copies hackers or bugs.
I could see eliminating -sql, -novice and -interfaces.
-performance is a little bit tougher because it may be a -hacker issue
or an -admin issue.
Docs should absolutely be separate in order to keep the noise level
down.
> I would also suggest junking pgsql-advocacy and pgsql-www as well.
> They're mostly noise but they're noise we should be at least
Sorry but that isn't going to happen and pgsql-www is nowhere near just
noise. It is vital to the operation of the infrastructure.
> peripherally aware of and not allow to slip under the radar because
> it happens in a corner where not everyone is subscribed. That's what
> happened recently on another topic and it seems to be what's
> happening now with this certification stuff.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director | PostgreSQL political pundit
