Stephen Frost wrote:
> Reviewing actual usage shows that a number of the lists aren't really
> categorized correctly under these categories. In particular, the
> "Regional" lists are actually more "per-language" lists than they are
> "Regional" in nature. To address that, we're planning to create a new
> category called "Per Language Lists" (better name suggestions are
> welcome) and move a number of the currently "regional" lists to that
> category.
>
> Individuals who are familiar with the various non-English lists are
> solicited to please help us distinguish the lists that are truely
> "Regional" from those which are really "Per-Language". My understanding
> is that, at least, the following lists are really per-language and not
> really regional:
>
> pgsql-es-ayuda
> pgsql-es-fomento
> pgsql-es-trabajos
> pgsql-fr-generale
> pgsql-de-allgemein
I think renaming the "Regional" category to "Language" is a fine
solution to the most of the problem.
AFAICT the only non-dead PUG lists are:
pdxpug
seapug
ecpug
lapug
Maybe those are the only ones that should be under "regional".
(I defended arpug previously but looking at it again, it seems to have
mostly languished & dead.)
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
