Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.208.211]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DFA6633533 for ; Sun, 15 Mar 2009 15:38:33 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.211]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 58862-05 for ; Sun, 15 Mar 2009 15:38:24 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-gx0-f177.google.com (mail-gx0-f177.google.com [209.85.217.177]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38B55633436 for ; Sun, 15 Mar 2009 15:38:26 -0300 (ADT) Received: by gxk25 with SMTP id 25so603920gxk.19 for ; Sun, 15 Mar 2009 11:38:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.150.205.13 with SMTP id c13mr6903700ybg.224.1237142304858; Sun, 15 Mar 2009 11:38:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <49BD4976.7020307@agliodbs.com> References: <49B1B802.2040000@agliodbs.com> <49BD4976.7020307@agliodbs.com> Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 18:38:24 +0000 Message-ID: <937d27e10903151138jead42faob95e1e54c474204b@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: Pentabarf instance for pgDays? From: Dave Page To: Josh Berkus Cc: PostgreSQL www Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200903/72 X-Sequence-Number: 16726 On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 6:31 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: > Josh Berkus wrote: >> >> All, >> >> SFPUG will soon need to organize a pgDay at OSCON. =A0We'd like to have = a >> Pentabarf (www.pentabarf.org) instance somewhere on a PostgreSQL.org ser= ver >> which we and other UGs could use to organize mini-conferences. > > Should I take the silence on this as a "the WWW group isn't interested in > hosting conference software, figure out something on your own"? This part of the WWW group doesn't have the spare cycles at the moment, but he does know that another part of the group lost a not-insignificant amount of hair trying (and failing) to get Pentabarf working in the past. I think the conclusion was that it was a fairly hideous and unsupportable piece of software. --=20 Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com