-----Original Message-----
From: "Josh Berkus"<josh@postgresql.org>
Sent: 03/12/05 21:05:59
To: "Dave Page"<dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
Cc: "jd@commandprompt.com"<jd@commandprompt.com>, "jnasby@pervasive.com"<jnasby@pervasive.com>,
"gevik@xs4all.nl"<gevik@xs4all.nl>,"denis@enterprisedb.com"<denis@enterprisedb.com>,
"syara@greenplum.com"<syara@greenplum.com>,"scrappy@hub.org"<scrappy@hub.org>, "paul.oh@sun.com"<paul.oh@sun.com>,
"andya@enterprisedb.com"<andya@enterprisedb.com>,"sslezak@pervasive.com"<sslezak@pervasive.com>,
"kennisgres-pgdn@pgfoundry.org"<kennisgres-pgdn@pgfoundry.org>,"shahzadk@enterprisedb.com"<shahzadk@enterprisedb.com>,
"pgsql-www@postgresql.org"<pgsql-www@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [Kennisgres-pgdn] RE: Mailing list, Joint PostgreSQL Knowledge Base
> Huh? I don't get it. How does "part of www.postgresql.org" contradict
> that?
It doesn't, but kb.postgresql.org would as it would be a separate site. I don't object to something like that being
proposed,but given the previous decision (which goes back to around the launch of the previous www site iirc), it
shouldbe proposed in the right place.
Of course, that doesn't mean that this group cannot decide whether or not to make that proposal.
Regards, Dave
-----Unmodified Original Message-----
Dave,
> > 1) Should be part of www.postgresql.org or be kb.postgresql.org.
>
> Aside from being a dubious "business requirement" imho, I should remind
> you that a decision was made long ago by the community to merge all the
> postgresql.org subsites together, and not to create new ones. Reviewing
> and potentially overturning that decision is definitely not something
> for this forum.
Huh? I don't get it. How does "part of www.postgresql.org" contradict
that?
--
--Josh Berkus
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Project Core Team
www.postgresql.org
(all opinions expressed are my own; I do not speak
for the Project unless specifically noted.)