From: Ken Wright <ken@cncware.com>
To: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>
To: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Proposed split of -interfaces list ...
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 23:27:41 -0800
Message-ID: <0101172316160L.19103@rover.cncware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.31.0101172315410.548-100000@thelab.hub.org>
References: <Pine.BSF.4.31.0101172315410.548-100000@thelab.hub.org>
I agree with the proposed split described below. It does simplify the weeding
process. As for changing -interfaces to -interfaces-misc, it makes little
difference to me. Re-subscribing is not a big deal.
> pgsql-interfaces-odbc@postgresql.org
> - ODBC related discussions
>
> pgsql-interfaces-jdbc@postgresql.org
> - JDBC related discussions
>
> pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org
> - libpq, libpq++, python, tcl
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org
Cc: ken@cncware.com, scrappy@hub.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Proposed split of -interfaces list ...
In-Reply-To: <0101172316160L.19103@rover.cncware.org>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox