X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB99632A128 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 20:06:57 +0100 (BST) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 11991-02 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 19:06:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from anchor-post-36.mail.demon.net (anchor-post-36.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.86]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FCF732A0AE for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 20:06:52 +0100 (BST) Received: from mailgate.vale-housing.co.uk ([80.176.1.146] helo=ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk) by anchor-post-36.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 4.42) id 1CD6GO-000NsE-Jt for pgsql-www@postgresql.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 19:06:48 +0000 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [#14748606] comp.databases.postgresql hierarchy X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 20:06:47 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [pgsql-www] [#14748606] comp.databases.postgresql hierarchy Thread-Index: AcSnDTvXh8abpyyCR5ulcR7CAWm7aQAEyc7Q From: "Dave Page" To: "Josh Berkus" , X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests= X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200409/316 X-Sequence-Number: 5386 =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: pgsql-www-owner@postgresql.org=20 > [mailto:pgsql-www-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Josh Berkus > Sent: 30 September 2004 17:47 > To: pgsql-www@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] [#14748606]=20 > comp.databases.postgresql hierarchy >=20 > Dave, >=20 > > Thank you for the information you provided in your reply. We really=20 > > appreciate your feedback, and we'll keep it in mind as we work to=20 > > improve Google Groups. >=20 > This looks to me like they cut us off for ulterior reasons=20 > and are avoiding=20 > the topic. Does it look that way to anyone else? Yes. I'm just not sure whether it's because we're a database project, or because they're trying to wind down groups.google which I can't imagine makes them a whole lot of cash. Any other theories? > Is it time to hunt up members of the community who have=20 > contacts at google, or start an e-mail petition drive? Both I say. Regards, Dave.