| From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Copeland <greg(at)CopelandConsulting(dot)Net> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>, raanders(at)acm(dot)org, PostgresSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Update on replication |
| Date: | 2002-12-18 02:55:43 |
| Message-ID: | 1040180142.1863.8.camel@tokyo |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 21:33, Greg Copeland wrote:
> I do agree, GBorg needs MUCH higher visibility!
I'm just curious: why do we need GBorg at all? Does it offer anything
that SourceForge, or a similar service does not offer?
Especially given that (a) most other OSS projects don't have a site for
"related projects" (unless you count something like CPAN, which is
totally different) (b) GBorg is completely unknown to anyone outside the
PostgreSQL community and even to many people within it...
Cheers,
Neil
--
Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-12-18 03:00:36 | Re: Update on replication |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-12-18 02:50:28 | Re: 7.3.1 stamped |