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

Re: Pgtheme: PostgreSQL theme for drupal 5.x and 6.x

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: "Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum" <ads(at)pgug(dot)de>, pgeu-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Pgtheme: PostgreSQL theme for drupal 5.x and 6.x
Date: 2008-01-24 16:25:08
Message-ID: 20080124082508.68908004@commandprompt.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgeu-general
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:18:00 +0000
"Dave Page" <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:

> I won't comment on what's there, or how long it's going to take you to
> fix it (though I assume it would be a similar amount of time as
> provisioning a whole new site) - but it certainly is there for local
> user groups - there's a bunch of them there already!
> 

Just so everyone understands, "I" am not the one fixing it. Selena is.
All I am doing is assisting her in infrastructure needs.


> > I will agree the new one will be better as it is based on Drupal
> > but I have a feeling it may take a little longer to get that up
> > than we expected.
> 
> I thought the current one was Drupal, just an old version.

Old version of Word press (not that it matters).

> 
> > Services hosted *shrug*, we have proven were good at it.
> 
> If you look at community01 (iirc), theres a bunch of distinctly
> different services on it such as (Devrims?) mailserver, planetpg,
> jabber, pgweb and more (from memory - I don't seem to have access any
> more :-( ).

? You should... (have access that is)


> Now I don't deny that they're all run well, but for a long
> while now we've been provisioning distinct services on their own VMs
> for security, ease of backup, upgrade, replacement, and moving (to
> another host or data center) - it's a lesson we learned long ago, and
> a way of operating that I'd rather not go back to.

As someone who has been doing the whole web hosting business since your
only option was a 2400 modem I can tell you that the way we do it works
well. I am not arguing that the vm idea is invalid. In fact it is
something we are moving to but we are able to provision and rebuild (if
required) very quickly.

Anyway, I don't know why we are having this discussion. I am not
arguing one way or the other to host it at CMD. The France machines are
fine.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake


> 
> /D
> 


- -- 
The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/ 
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564   24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
SELECT 'Training', 'Consulting' FROM vendor WHERE name = 'CMD'


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHmLvkATb/zqfZUUQRAs4aAJ96D8zwSLpfMM+nT0AsPRogGvkkKwCgktT7
SdZ4yJuyLRlGDVeJgJ36/nI=
=mymx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

In response to

pgeu-general by date

Next:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2008-01-25 09:15:07
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Europe statutes : recap
Previous:From: Dave PageDate: 2008-01-24 16:18:00
Subject: Re: Pgtheme: PostgreSQL theme for drupal 5.x and 6.x

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