Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: postgresql.net vs.
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: postgresql.net vs. |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 11654.1079116607@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: On pgweb project (Re: Update on 'portal' changes) ("Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: postgresql.net vs.
Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: postgresql.net vs. Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: postgresql.net vs. |
| Список | pgsql-www |
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org> writes:
> the projects site will not be under postgresql.org ... postgresql.net is
> available for it, but not postgresql.org ... we are keeping that domain
> "clean" for any future stuff we want to do with the core project ...
I agree we don't want <project>.postgresql.org, as that is likely to
risk name conflicts. However, that objection doesn't apply to
<project>.projects.postgresql.org, or variants of that. So far the only
objection I've heard to that sort of setup is "the domain name is too
long", and as others have pointed out, it's a weak objection.
Since we do already own pgfoundry.org, could we satisfy everybody by
dual-naming the project sites? That is, have both
<project>.pgfoundry.org
<project>.pgfoundry.postgresql.org
point to the same place?
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-www по дате отправления: