Re: The Name Game: postgresql.net vs. pgfoundry.org

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