Joshua Drake escribió:
> On Tue, 2 Sep 2008 10:34:21 -0400
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>
> > Selena Deckelmann escribió:
> > What do people think about creating a new category (list group) and
> > sticking pgus-general and pgeu-general on it? What should that
> > category be named?
>
> Well it depends on what the purpose of the new category is.
> PostgreSQLFR for example, where would that go? It isn't technically a
> user group but is also a non profit. ITPUG is a little easier as it is
> a user group and a non profit.
The purpose of the new category is to be able to categorize the lists
better. If you are suggesting it to be named "Non profit" I think
that's a nonstarter, because all the other lists are not-for-profit too.
What I want is the categories to keep some relationships with the
descriptions we're going to give the lists. So for PUGs we would use a
geographical region name (so the okpug list would be described as
"Oklahoma", etc). For "regional lists" we would use a language name (so
pgsql-de-allgemein should be described as "German" or maybe "Deutsch").
If you're proposing to move pgus-general and pgeu-general under "User
Groups", that's fine with me too.
PostgreSQLFR and ITPUG have nothing to do here, because they're not
hosted on our archives site.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
