Re: Is there really no interest in SQL Standard?

On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of mié sep 21 00:27:53 -0300 2011:
>>
>> On tis, 2011-09-20 at 11:12 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> > > > +1 for a closed mailing list.  It's a bit annoying to have to do
>> > > > such a thing, but it's not like we haven't got other closed
>> > > > lists for appropriate purposes.
>> > >
>> > > Well, that much we've already decided a few years ago.  The
>> > > blocking issues are: (1) do we have enough interest, and (2) where
>> > > to put it (I'm looking at you, pgfoundry).
>> >
>> > I don't see why we wouldn't put it in @postgresql.org.
>>
>> One nice thing about pgfoundry would be the document manager.  Also, at
>> least at some point in the past, a pgfoundry project was easier to
>> manage than getting anything done about a @postgresql.org mailing list.
>
> The document manager might be useful, true.  I cannot speak about past
> administrators of the Majordomo installation that serves the
> @postgresql.org lists, though.  For all intents and purposes, it seems
> I'm in charge of it now.

Only "seems"? :-)

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

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