On Fri, 2004-03-12 at 10:14, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: Andreas Pflug [ mailto:pgadmin@pse-consulting.de
> <mailto:pgadmin@pse-consulting.de> ]
>
> Sent: 12 March 2004 13:57
>
> To: josh@agliodbs.com <mailto:josh@agliodbs.com>
>
> Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org <mailto:pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
>
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: postgresql.net vs. pgfoundry.org
>
> Isn't gforge a pgsql related project itself?
>
> So I'd suggest:
>
>
>
> www.postgresql.org <http://www.postgresql.org> -> main PostgreSQL
> site
>
> gforge.postgresql.org -> gforge interface site
>
> <projectname>.postgresql.org -> gforge hosted projects
>
>
>
>
>
> The problem with that approach is that our 'official' sites then get
>
> lost amongst the project sites.
>
>
>
> We need some distinction between the core project sites and other
>
> project sites - istm that a different domain is the only way to do that.
>
> (breaking previous rule) I agree.
>
> Also, the gforge people would prefer us *not* to use a name that
> includes gforge, because of the risk of confusion. That's how we came up
> with "pgfoundry" in the first place.
>
maybe pgsqlfoundry is a better compromise?
Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL