content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: GForge WAS: Feeds Integration
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 20:40:27 -0000
Message-ID: <03AF4E498C591348A42FC93DEA9661B889F44E@mail.vale-housing.co.uk>
Thread-Topic: [pgsql-www] GForge WAS: Feeds Integration
Thread-Index: AcP37w1psOWS+acJT6SaDPCeyovIMAAACXOA
From: "Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
To: <josh@agliodbs.com>,
	"PostgreSQL WWW Mailing List" <pgsql-www@postgresql.org>

=20

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Josh Berkus [mailto:josh@agliodbs.com]=20
> Sent: 20 February 2004 20:20
> To: Dave Page; PostgreSQL WWW Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] GForge WAS: Feeds Integration
>=20
> Dave,
>=20
> > Well, hang on. Why Gforge? Are there other solutions? If so then I=20
> > think any voting/discussions/whatever should include the=20
> choice of new=20
> > platform.
>=20
> Do you have another proposal?   Like I said, I'll be putting=20
> forward the case=20
> for GForge; if there's another program you like, feel free to=20
> counter-propose.

I'm not fussed either way - I'm just trying to suggest not putting in
effort building a new VM and configuring Gforge prior to discussion.
Someone else may convince everyone that something else is better thus
wasting all your hard work.

> As if I could prevent discussion.=20

I'm not saying you could. It sounded like you wanted a vote first and
discussion later which sounds like a recipe for disaster. Like I said
though, I might have misunderstood you.

> My point is that this has=20
> been discussed,=20
> off and on, on this list and elsewhere repeatedly without any=20
> action being taken.

Well yeah, but that's because we decided to stick with Gborg.

> I'm going to throw up a specific proposal for=20
> action, and if people=20
> shoot it down, then so be it.

Fair enough, can't (and wouldn't) argue with that.

Regards, Dave.