Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: postgresql.net vs.

From: Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca>
To: "Jeroen T(dot) Vermeulen" <jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl>
Cc: Thomas Swan <tswan(at)idigx(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>,PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>,pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: postgresql.net vs.
Date: 2004-03-12 17:23:43
Message-ID: 1079112222.736.5.camel@jester (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-www
On Fri, 2004-03-12 at 11:52, Jeroen T. Vermeulen wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 10:43:34AM -0600, Thomas Swan wrote:
> > 
> > foundry.postgresql.org?
> 
> Been through that one...  Too long when you have to add project name as
> well.

I don't understand why. Presumably the postgresql.org website will have
a search for it, or it'll be a link, or it'll be a bookmark.

How many people actually type in the full url anymore?

Heck, when I goto the postgresql website I do a search in google for
"postgres" and slam the "I'm feeling lucky" button.

Having all PostgreSQL related material under one domain is beneficial to
the project. Our big issue isn't the domain is too long, it is difficult
find the subproject in the first place.



In response to

Responses

pgsql-www by date

Next:From: Joe ConwayDate: 2004-03-12 17:26:22
Subject: Re: The Name Game: postgresql.net vs. pgfoundry.org
Previous:From: Joe ConwayDate: 2004-03-12 17:20:00
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: postgresql.net vs. pgfoundry.org

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2004-03-12 17:23:53
Subject: Re: [DEFAULT] Daily digest v1.4327 (22 messages)
Previous:From: Joe ConwayDate: 2004-03-12 17:20:00
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: postgresql.net vs. pgfoundry.org

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group