Re: Proposal to shutdown pgFoundry

On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 8:11 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> Excerpts from Dave Page's message of vie may 20 13:38:20 -0400 2011:
>> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
>
>> > Even more importantly, the mailings lists on pgfoundry are a critical
>> > piece of the buildfarm infrastructure - that's how status notifications
>> > get out to people like Tom. We also need lists for commit notifications
>> > and members discussion.
>>
>> Any reason we couldn't use the main list server for that?
>
> Assuming it's reliable enough ... ;-)
>
> How many new lists are we talking about?

Dunno. We'd have to figure out how we decide which projects to ask,
and then ask them.

Another option that Stefan just mentioned to me is to have a dedicated
mailman instance for these lists, in a different namespace (in fact,
it could even be the current instance, migrated to a new box, but
without the GForge integration). The downside with that is that it
would still need maintenance, and we'll still be looking after two
completely separate mailing list and archive systems which seems to be
far from ideal.

--
Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake

EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company