Received: from localhost (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD04D9FB290; Thu, 8 Feb 2007 12:30:38 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 55716-09; Thu, 8 Feb 2007 12:30:14 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4 X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4 Received: from svr2.hagander.net (svr2.hagander.net [88.198.128.226]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 524DB9FB2EE; Thu, 8 Feb 2007 12:30:20 -0400 (AST) Received: from svr2.hagander.net (svr2.hagander.net [88.198.128.226]) by svr2.hagander.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 453EEDCC3F2; Thu, 8 Feb 2007 17:30:19 +0100 (CET) Received: by svr2.hagander.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id AD9C4DCC3FC; Thu, 8 Feb 2007 17:29:39 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 17:29:39 +0100 From: Magnus Hagander To: "Joshua D. Drake" Cc: Dave Page , Bruce Momjian , PostgreSQL www , "Marc G. Fournier" Subject: Re: Another request ignored Message-ID: <20070208162939.GA29102@svr2.hagander.net> References: <200702071831.l17IVpX27461@momjian.us> <45CA3D86.100@postgresql.org> <45CA6C7E.6030703@commandprompt.com> <20070208085613.GD27377@svr2.hagander.net> <45CB4270.6040401@commandprompt.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <45CB4270.6040401@commandprompt.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200702/155 X-Sequence-Number: 11560 On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 07:32:00AM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Magnus Hagander wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 04:19:10PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > >> Dave Page wrote: > >>> Bruce Momjian wrote: > >>>> Why am I having to ask multiple times to get anything fixed lately? > >>> Probably because you are asking the web team to fix a mailing list > >>> issue. I would suggest CC'ing Marc to ensure he reads it rather than > >>> relying on him not missing it amongst the web stuff (which I believe he > >>> tends to skim). > >>> > >>> Regards, Dave. > >> Shouldn't this really be a sysadmins list type deal anyway? > > > > Certainly not. The sysadmins list deals with *server maintenance*. > > perhaps it should be extended to server administration? I'd rather see it included in -www then. sysadmins is supposed to be very low traffic and infrastructure critical stuff. //Magnus