MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <28084.1239908933@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <937d27e10904160107t6406b64cxddec956619c3374@mail.gmail.com>
	<200904162129.46832.peter_e@gmx.net>
	<937d27e10904161132v2b3d010evdbdf13410f07b20@mail.gmail.com>
	<28084.1239908933@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 20:24:23 +0100
Message-ID: <937d27e10904161224j56ec0408mf4bd69c25b0dcbe5@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Archives policy
From: Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, pgsql-www@postgresql.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> writes:
>> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 7:29 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrot=
e:
>>> Altogether that page now reads like, our archiving system is too stupid=
 to
>>> handle removals and we are too busy to bother. =A0Not sure if that will=
 serve to
>>> convince people. =A0"Extremely difficult" is after all the same as "pos=
sible".
>
>> Well that is essentially correct :-) Any suggestions for alternative tex=
t?
>
> The really key point is the one about there being many copies of our
> archives that we have no control over, so asking us to remove our
> copy accomplishes nothing worth the complainant's trouble. =A0The rest is
> unlikely to deter anyone.

In my experience, the number of copies is also unlikely to deter a
fair percentage. Many of these people are complete nuts - I've had one
claim the CIA will assassinate them because they can be traced through
our archives before! It's nonsense of course, but it'll make my life
easier to have a definitive answer for those and the saner folks so I
can direct them to it and then ignore any further complaints.


--=20
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK:   http://www.enterprisedb.com