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

Re: Slony NG

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Slony NG
Date: 2004-07-14 04:32:36
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-admin
jseymour(at)linxnet(dot)com (Jim Seymour) writes:
> will give
> you an idea of the process.

AFAIK *none* of the comp.databases.postgresql newsgroups have actually
been put through the vote process, and so they are all rogue groups in
the eyes of people who take Usenet seriously.  (This used to bother me
quite a bit back when I took Usenet seriously, but I stopped reading it
five or more years ago.)

If anyone actually wants to do something in this line, the first step
would be to shepherd through a vote legitimizing the existing postgresql
groups.  Don't expect it to be easy, as I am sure we are already on the
hate-list of a lot of Usenet people for having ignored the voting
process for so many years.

If by some chance you are still alive after that, you can think about
proposing brand new newsgroups.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-admin by date

Next:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2004-07-14 07:21:22
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Point in Time Recovery
Previous:From: mike gDate: 2004-07-14 02:46:55
Subject: Re: statistics collector: number of function calls

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group