Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Organization: Aglio Database Solutions
To: "Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>,
	"PostgreSQL www" <pgsql-www@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: PGSQL-WINDOWS mailing list?
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 09:30:22 -0700
User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3
References: 
 <E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E41A76CB@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: 
 <E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E41A76CB@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-Id: <200408110930.22269.josh@agliodbs.com>

Dave,

> That's a different issue altogether though (perfectly valid though). Is
> there a more appropriate way to split the existing groups perhaps? I'm
> opposed to shifting the windows users onto a platform specific group
> just because there's a lot of them. I'm not opposed to shifting them if
> we find there are lots of platform specific problems though.

Well, unfortunately, at least 70% of the Windows users can be counted on not 
to differentiate platform-specific issues from general ones.  And given the 
flakyness of the platform, I expect there to be continuous issues.  Also, I'd 
really rather not have a 25-post thread on PGSQL-SQL discussing how XP-SP3 
breaks PostgreSQL.   

While there are other possible lists we could add, the advantage of 
PGSQL-WINDOWS is that it would attract a substantial portion of the new 
users, which, for example, a list named PGSQL-INSTALL might not.

On a completely different topic, who's in charge of ODBC these days?  I'm 
getting breakage reports on IRC.

-- 
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco