Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36A732E304D for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 18:13:49 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 97232-06 for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 18:13:48 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5F2422E2126 for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 18:13:48 -0300 (ADT) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 14 Mar 2008 21:13:46 -0000 Received: from xdsl-87-79-49-67.netcologne.de (EHLO colt.pezone.net) [87.79.49.67] by mail.gmx.net (mp041) with SMTP; 14 Mar 2008 22:13:46 +0100 X-Authenticated: #495269 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19rRoRGcVNrvvMljV3cSE8ghu4ZWFBY+KucJ8kxxn kSeCyJ+E/pFc13 From: Peter Eisentraut To: pgsql-www@postgresql.org Subject: Re: mailing lists for US PostgreSQL Association Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 22:13:44 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 Cc: "Selena Deckelmann" References: <2b5e566d0803131017y22af8ab5n40b0c63b9e31a065@mail.gmail.com> <200803142052.28256.peter_e@gmx.net> <2b5e566d0803141304x7f61b97h9e5b33ac773e796d@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <2b5e566d0803141304x7f61b97h9e5b33ac773e796d@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200803142213.45283.peter_e@gmx.net> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200803/352 X-Sequence-Number: 14471 Selena Deckelmann wrote: > On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 12:52 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > You wrote: > > > > Why are you not using your own domain postgresql.us for this? > > > > > > We're joining the pgsql-eu group in this same mailing list space. > > > > Well, first of all, the pgsql-eu-general list is, as just discussed, not > > actually related to any "group". > > That's not what I read from Dave Page, or from participating in the > pgsql-eu-general list. Well, I could obviously be wrong, because I can't read what was in people's minds when they set up certain structures, but when someone sets up a pgsql-foo-general list, then it certainly seems to be a list for anything related to "foo", rather than a PostgreSQL user group in the "foo" region. The fact that most of the early discussion about "anything" in the "eu" region was about forming a user group should not be seen as evidence that the pgsql-eu-general list is specifically and exclusively for EU user group affairs now. What would we do if anyone really wanted a list for general EU things? > > And secondly, the European group is just > > two weeks old, and we are going to have more groups popping up now, it's > > the right time to think about the issue in general. > > Yeah, we're going to start having namespace collisions :) > > We already discussed the classification, and I thought everyone came > to a consensus in that thread about Regional/User > Group/User/Developer. > > See Alvaro and Marc's work on updating Majordomo categories. Well, pgsql-eu-general is still listed as a regional list, which I was under the impression was its intent, but if it is a user group list now, it should be moved, and aliased to something more descriptive.