Subject: Fwd: Re: [ANNOUNCE] PostgreSQL Users' Group sites now available

From: Josh Berkus <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 09:46:18 -0700

Guys,

Jean-Paul wants a link on the main PUG page to the PostgreSQL French Community 
web site.   Is there any reason not to?

-Josh

----------  Forwarded Message  ----------

Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] PostgreSQL Users' Group sites now available
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 10:37:57 +0200
From: Jean-Paul ARGUDO <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]

> but we are ready to have others!

Could you please add a link there to the french community of PostgreSQL in
France? We setted up a web site too, with a drupal system

at http://www.postgresqlfr.org

> If you have a local group that meets and discusses PostgreSQL, we would be
> happy to give you your own page to make announcements and coordinate.
> Contact [email-masked].

That is a community of PG users, we dont' meet and discusses physicaly yet,
 may be one day, we're on irc: irc.freenode.net #postgresqlfr...

Is that a problem??

thanks!

--
Jean-Paul ARGUDO

 Site perso : http://www.argudo.org
 PostgreSQL : http://www.postgresqlfr.org
 l'APRIL    : http://www.april.org

-------------------------------------------------------

-- 
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

---

From: Robert Treat <[email-masked]>
Date: 12 May 2004 14:10:31 -0400

I think PUG implies physical meetings and such, and I don't think the
french community site falls into that category... we do have a link to
it from the main www page though.

Robert Treat

On Wed, 2004-05-12 at 12:46, Josh Berkus wrote:
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

-- 
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL

---

From: elein <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 11:12:21 -0700

I think we should err on the side of openess.
That is, we should not restrict the pugs based
on anything except that the organization is
a users group and its primary focus is PostgreSQL.

--elein

On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 02:10:31PM -0400, Robert Treat wrote:
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [email-masked]

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 15:17:31 -0300 (ADT)

I can't see any reason why not ...

>  may be one day, we're on irc: irc.freenode.net #postgresqlfr...

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: [email-masked]           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 15:41:11 -0300 (ADT)

> a users group and its primary focus is PostgreSQL.

Agreed ... but, that does call into question what happens if a group in
French *does* start a "phyiscal get together" user group, and isn't
assocated with the 'web prescense only' one?  Does one over-ride the
other?

> TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
>

----

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 15:50:48 -0300 (ADT)

On Wed, 12 May 2004, Rod Taylor wrote:

> On Wed, 2004-05-12 at 14:41, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> What would you do if 3 different French cities started independent
> groups?

Valid question ... but, IMHO, if we are going to define (and I'm not
saying that we need to) a UG, the one thing that should be defined is
"region of coverage" ... having one UG say that its "for France" is, IMHO,
way way too broad.  Never having been there myself, but even if based
centrally in Paris (semi-central to the country, no?), I can imagine it
the country is larger then a 1hr driving radius from there, no?

I think it would be redundant to have two in, say, San Francisco, but not
to have one in SF and one in Berkeley, for instance ...

----

---

From: elein <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 11:54:18 -0700

Still we should err on the side of openness. So what if
there is one for all of France *and* one for Paris, say.
So what if there is more than one in SF. 

The only requirement should be that it be a users group
and have as its primary focus PostgreSQL.

Let people arrange themselves how they will.

--elein

---

From: Josh Berkus <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 13:34:54 -0700

Marc,

> the country is larger then a 1hr driving radius from there, no?

I think this is way too micro-managed.   Who has time for this stuff?  Let the 
users' groups declare themselves however they want.

I would *love* to have the problem of so many users' groups that they overlap.   
May I point out that we currently have 3, and two have yet to have a meeting?

-- 
-Josh Berkus
 Aglio Database Solutions
 San Francisco

---

From: Tom Lane <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 16:50:43 -0400

> I would *love* to have the problem of so many users' groups that they

I agree with Josh.  We can sort it out if and when there's actually a
conflict, but at the moment this argument seems pretty pointless.

			regards, tom lane

---

From: Robert Treat <[email-masked]>
Date: 12 May 2004 16:51:49 -0400

> May I point out that we currently have 3, and two have yet to have a meeting?

Hmm... I thought the criteria was simple... it was a site for user
groups... the french community site isn't a user group, therefore it
doesnt belong in the list for users groups... but whatever, if you guys
feel like adding it go for it, and while you're at it you could probably
add all the other community sites listed on the main page as well.

Robert Treat

---

From: Rod Taylor <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 16:54:28 -0400

-- 
Rod Taylor <rbt [at] rbt [dot] ca>

Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
PGP Key: http://www.rbt.ca/signature.asc

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 18:03:45 -0300 (ADT)

> conflict, but at the moment this argument seems pretty pointless.

I have to agree with Robert on this though ... a UG, at least what I think
is the defacto standard for it, is a group that gets together ... linking
to "PostgreSQL related web sites" is not for pug.postgresql.org, or, at
least, shouldn't be ... a 'Related Sites' link off of www.postgresql.org,
yes ...

I'm not so much worried about micro-managing, but there should be *some*
criteria for inclusion, and I think monthly, schedualed meetings should be
a big one ...

----

---

From: David Fetter <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 14:15:41 -0700

On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 06:03:45PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > I agree with Josh.  We can sort it out if and when there's
> > actually a conflict, but at the moment this argument seems pretty
> > pointless.
> 
> I have to agree with Robert on this though ... a UG, at least what I
> think is the defacto standard for it, is a group that gets together
> ... linking to "PostgreSQL related web sites" is not for
> pug.postgresql.org, or, at least, shouldn't be

Why not?

> ... a 'Related Sites' link off of www.postgresql.org, yes ...
> 
> I'm not so much worried about micro-managing, but there should be
> *some* criteria for inclusion,

Great!  How about willingness to be included?  At this stage, that's
plenty.

> and I think monthly, schedualed meetings should be a big one ...

Please pardon me while I add in a little reality check to this grand
plan.  SF PostgreSQL Users' Group, far and away the largest to date,
has had one once every 2-3 months.  According to this "criterion,"
there are no pugs at all right now, let alone three fledgling ones.

Cheers,
D
-- 
David Fetter [email-masked] http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 510 893 6100   mobile: +1 415 235 3778

Remember to vote!

---

From: Bruce Momjian <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 21:34:04 -0400 (EDT)

> web site.   Is there any reason not to?

Jean-Paul is also setting up a big PostgreSQL track for next February at
the same show I attended this year in Paris.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  [email-masked]               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---

From: Robert Treat <[email-masked]>
Date: 13 May 2004 10:38:36 -0400

hey look, a dead horse, let's go beat it...

> there are no pugs at all right now, let alone three fledgling ones.

they at least have the intention of meeting in person, which I think is
what Mark was getting at. 

Robert Treat