On Mar 12, 2004, at 9:07 AM, Jeroen T. Vermeulen wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 07:01:47PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>> Actually, proposal (A) does provide such a separation: notice that the
>> projects would go under *.postgresql.net, with the core database
>> remaining
>> at *.postgresql.org. I am not sure if that will provoke confusion or
>> not, but I think I like it better than pgfoundry because it is clear
>> that the domains are related. pgfoundry seems a bit, um, random.
>
> Agree with the last bit, but I really feel that the difference between
> postgresql.org and postgresql.net is too subtle--at least for people
> who
> don't work with either very often.
Just to speak up (as an avid lurker), I agree with Jeroen that this
distinction is quite subtle and may cause confusion. Some may even
expect the two to resolve to the same site, as a lot of popular sites
own .com/.net/.org, all resolving to the same site.
This can be read as support for *.pgfoundry.org, *.postgresql.org, or
*.pgfoundry.postgresql.org.
*.pgfoundry.org is short and clearly distinguished from postgresql.org
*.postgresql.org is short, and clearly associated with postgresql.org
(of course!), but there's no clear distinction that the former gborg
projects are separate from, say, developer.postgresql.org or
techdocs.postgresql.org. Is this distinction important? Maybe not?
*.pgfoundry.postgresql.org is longer, clearly associated with
postgresql.org, and clear that it's a distinct part of postgresql.org
Michael Glaesemann
grzm myrealbox com
