Re: comp.databases.postgresql.* groups and RFD - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Woodchuck Bill
Subject Re: comp.databases.postgresql.* groups and RFD
Date
Msg-id Xns95ADC18932913bswr607h4@130.133.1.4
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: comp.databases.postgresql.* groups and RFD  (Woodchuck Bill <bwr607@hotmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
Gary L. Burnore <gburnore@databasix.com> wrote in
news:co8fbk$70o$3@blackhelicopter.databasix.com:

>>I just realized what a bad name pgsql.* is for a hierarchy. If someone
>>wants to look for a newgroup for PostgreSQL, he will type that
>>word/string into his newsreader and it will not bring up any of these
>>newsgroups.
>
> Newbies would, yeah. but pgsql is a common reference to it.

Newbies looking for an entry level group might pass novice or general and
find a dead alt.* group as the only newsgroup with "postgresql" in the
name. Something to consider.

--
Bill

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Woodchuck Bill
Date:
Subject: Re: Why the current setup of pgsql.* and comp.databases.postresql.general are BROKEN
Next
From: Michael Fuhr
Date:
Subject: Re: Can one alter the format of a numeric column?