X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.2])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 5B687D1B979; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 19:02:15 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 27283-01; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 15:02:07 -0400 (AST)
Received: from smtp.sunflower.com (smtp.sunflower.com [24.124.0.128])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id B10FCD1C4E0; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 15:02:04 -0400 (AST)
Received: from kungfu (gozur.sunflowerbroadband.com [24.124.4.220])
	by smtp.sunflower.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id i2CJ22Ul021401;
	Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:02:02 -0600
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:02:00 -0600
From: Frank Wiles <frank@wiles.org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: scrappy@postgresql.org, pg@rbt.ca, jtv@xs4all.nl,
	tswan@idigx.com, xzilla@users.sourceforge.net,
	pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, pgsql-www@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: postgresql.net vs.
Message-Id: <20040312130200.73b87a68.frank@wiles.org>
In-Reply-To: <11654.1079116607@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <03AF4E498C591348A42FC93DEA9661B889F5DD@mail.vale-housing.co.uk>
	<200403111808.09687.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
	<200403111519.55064.josh@agliodbs.com>
	<200403120811.24506.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
	<9272.1079104465@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<14858.199.222.14.2.1079109814.squirrel@www.idigx.com>
	<20040312165255.GY39391@xs4all.nl> <1079112222.736.5.camel@jester>
	<20040312142952.V64550@ganymede.hub.org>
	<11654.1079116607@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.7 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org
X-Archive-Number: 200403/186
X-Sequence-Number: 4002

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:36:47 -0500
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org> writes:
> > the projects site will not be under postgresql.org ...
> > postgresql.net is available for it, but not postgresql.org ... we
> > are keeping that domain"clean" for any future stuff we want to do
> > with the core project ...
> 
> I agree we don't want <project>.postgresql.org, as that is likely to
> risk name conflicts.  However, that objection doesn't apply to
> <project>.projects.postgresql.org, or variants of that.  So far the
> only objection I've heard to that sort of setup is "the domain name is
> too long", and as others have pointed out, it's a weak objection.
> 
> Since we do already own pgfoundry.org, could we satisfy everybody by
> dual-naming the project sites?  That is, have both
> 	<project>.pgfoundry.org
> 	<project>.pgfoundry.postgresql.org
> point to the same place?

  My first vote would have been for postgresql.net, but I think 
  <project>.projects.postgresql.org makes the most sense.  If I wasn't
  "in the know" I wouldn't associate
  <something>.pgfoundry.(pgfoundry|postgresql).org with a PostgreSQL
  related projects by looking at the URL only.  

  As for the "length" of the URL, I think any developer or user 
  of PostgreSQL is knowledgeable enough to take advantage of browser
  bookmarks. :) 

  I'm definitely against using 'pgfoundry.org' as I believe sub-projects
  should all fall under the currently used postgresql.org domain. 

  Another thing to think about is search engine placement.  Most search
  engines give higher listings to keywords that are in the domain name.
  While people will search for 'postgres' and/or 'postgresql' no one
  is going to come up with 'pgfoundry' on their own. 

 ---------------------------------
   Frank Wiles <frank@wiles.org>
   http://frank.wiles.org
 ---------------------------------