Thread: Re: RFD

> Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>
>> I saw a post indicating a request for discussion on the creation of an
>> official big 8 newsgroup comp.databases.postgresql.general. According to
>> the notice this newsgroup already exists in google groups and is actively
>> being used. The discussion will be in news.groups.
>

I would like to point out that it is NOT creating a different group.  It
will still be the same, and there will not be a split or anything.  What
will happen is that the postgresql group will become legitimate, and
therefore all usenet servers will carry the group.

So this is a process that should have happened when the
comp.databases.postresql.* usenet groups were originally created.  I'm
seeing a lot of support for this, except for one person (who seems to not
like me personally).

I would welcome people to read through news.groups and follow the postgresql
threads.

P.S.  I am just posting this so people can review the RFD (request for
discussion) and please post any suggestions on improvements/likes/dislikes
so it can be made better.  As not to distract the discussions away from the
normal topic, I will post to the postgresql groups no more than once per
week until it is time for the call for votes (CFV).

In article <2v0ibhF2dsc92U1@uni-berlin.de>,
Mike Cox  <mikecoxlinux@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>I would like to point out that it is NOT creating a different group.  It
>will still be the same, and there will not be a split or anything.  What
>will happen is that the postgresql group will become legitimate, and
>therefore all usenet servers will carry the group.

[I'm posting this from news.groups, where this discussion is being
crossposted.  I have no connection with the postgresql groups myself; I'm
just a longtime observer of the newsgroup-creation process.]

Just to clarify Mike's comments and make a minor correction... if this
proposal comes to a vote and passes, it will *not* guarantee that "all"
Usenet servers will carry the comp.databases.postgresql.general.  There
are servers that do not keep in sync with the "official" list of groups
maintained by the moderators of news.announce.newgroups, out of laziness
or other reasons.  Nevertheless, it *will* cause significantly more
servers to carry the group than before, including most or all of the
"well-managed" ones.

And it will have no effect on the availability or functioning of the group
on those servers that currently do carry it, except of course that you'll
probably have more postings to read.

--
Jon Bell <jtbellm4h@presby.edu>                     Presbyterian College
Dept. of Physics and Computer Science        Clinton, South Carolina USA