Since we have the discussion going, someone mentioned that the group name
should be comp.databases.postgresql. I think this is a good name and I'd
like to see what everyone thinks of it.
There is also the issue of the charter. I would like to get some feed back
on what the best charter could be
Woodchuck Bill wrote:
> Mike Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> berlin.de:
>
>> Since we have the discussion going, someone mentioned that the group name
>> should be comp.databases.postgresql. I think this is a good name and I'd
>> like to see what everyone thinks of it.
Devin L. Ganger wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 11:11:09 -0800, Mike Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> Since we have the discussion going, someone mentioned that the group
>> name
>> should be comp.databases.postgresql. I think this is a good name and
>> I'd like to see what everyone thinks
Polarhound wrote:
> Mike Cox wrote:
>
>> There is resistance in the mailing lists however, even though the groups
>> are
>> already on usenet and are in the managed "big 8" name space without RFD
>> and CFV.
>
> This now brings up the question of traffic numbers. Historically, if
> people are
Woodchuck Bill wrote:
> Mike Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>
>> I cannot handle the volume of email that a mailing list would place
>> on my
>> inbox.
>
> Ever heard of a digest version?
>
I don't care. Its too much of a hassle to dig through without being able t
Devin L. Ganger wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 18:03:57 -0800, Mike Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> Devin L. Ganger wrote:
>
>> > I think you're pursuing this backwards, Mike. You should contact the
>> > current owner of the present mail-to-news gateway and build some sort
>> > of consensus
On Sat, 6 Nov 2004, Mike Cox wrote:
1. I tried subscribing to comp.databases.postgresql.general through my
usenet provider thinking it was a regular big 8 group. When it wasn't
found, I sent a request to my news provider to include it.
Most modern news readers allow for multiple news server ... j
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Sat, 6 Nov 2004, Mike Cox wrote:
1. I tried subscribing to comp.databases.postgresql.general through my
usenet provider thinking it was a regular big 8 group. When it wasn't
found, I sent a request to my news provider to include it.
Most modern news readers allow for m
On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 11:11:09 -0800, Mike Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Since we have the discussion going, someone mentioned that the group name
> should be comp.databases.postgresql. I think this is a good name and I'd
> like to see what everyone thinks of it.
I think you're pursuing this
Mike Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> I cannot handle the volume of email that a mailing list would place
> on my
> inbox.
Ever heard of a digest version?
--
Bill
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: the planner will ign
On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 18:03:57 -0800, Mike Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Devin L. Ganger wrote:
> > I think you're pursuing this backwards, Mike. You should contact the
> > current owner of the present mail-to-news gateway and build some sort of
> > consensus with *him* on what the problem and
"Devin L. Ganger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>> Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, seems very knowledgable about this,
>> and I would be pleased if you could mail the postgresql list person
>> about this discussion and Russ's email address.
>
> Russ is a busy person;
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike Cox
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm pretty much done with this anyway. It is a waste of time putting in
> anymore effort since no one seems to want it.
You're way too impatient. Things don't happen here in time scales that
are measured in hours or days. Ha
Mike Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
berlin.de:
> Since we have the discussion going, someone mentioned that the group name
> should be comp.databases.postgresql. I think this is a good name and I'd
> like to see what everyone thinks of it.
Much better, especially if you
In news.groups, Mike Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm pretty much done with this anyway. It is a waste of time putting in
> anymore effort since no one seems to want it.
Well, the problem from my perspective is that a lot of time and energy is
being spent on worrying about how to propose so
In news.groups, Devin L Ganger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Mike Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, seems very knowledgable about this,
>> and I would be pleased if you could mail the postgresql list person
>> about this discussion and Russ's email address.
>
On Sat, 6 Nov 2004, Russ Allbery wrote:
If Marc was happy with them being turned into real Big Eight groups and
the technical issues of the gatewaying were worked out with Marco or
someone else
what 'techincal issues of the gatewaying'?
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (h
At 12:16 AM 11/7/2004, Russ Allbery wrote:
In news.groups, Mike Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm pretty much done with this anyway. It is a waste of time putting in
> anymore effort since no one seems to want it.
Well, the problem from my perspective is that a lot of time and energy is
being
Marc G Fournier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, 6 Nov 2004, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> If Marc was happy with them being turned into real Big Eight groups and
>> the technical issues of the gatewaying were worked out with Marco or
>> someone else
> what 'techincal issues of the gatewaying'?
Th
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004, Russ Allbery wrote:
There are a couple of things that would be ideal to fix. One is that
currently the gateway isn't rewriting message IDs, which means that if
anyone else gates the same mailing lists into some other group, the
posts will conflict and posts will randomly dis
On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 22:27:08 -0600, Dave Balderstone
> You're way too impatient. Things don't happen here in time scales that
> are measured in hours or days. Hang in there. You've got a good start
> and some good people supporting what you want to do.
>
> Relax, take your time (and the advise of
Brian {Hamilton Kelly} wrote:
> On Saturday, in article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Mike Cox" wrote:
>
>> Woodchuck Bill wrote:
>>
>> > Mike Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>> >
>> >> I cannot handle the volume of email that a mailing list would
On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 12:55:06 -0800
Mike Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> ...
> There is also the point of having to post. If I post and I subscribe to the
> digest version or if I post with the option of no emails (since my inbox
> cannot handle the load), how would I respond to a thread I created
On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 12:55:06PM -0800, Mike Cox wrote:
> There is also the point of having to post. If I post and I subscribe to the
> digest version or if I post with the option of no emails (since my inbox
> cannot handle the load), how would I respond to a thread I created? Would
> I have t
Marc G Fournier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> We are doing that specifically for that reason ... In order to provide
> redundancy, we currently have two mail<->news gateways of the mailing
> lists in place, and the MessageIds are what prevents duplicates ...
Yeah, I just found out about that toda
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004, Russ Allbery wrote:
Yeah, I understand it's not how the groups are set up, but it does seem
a little confusing. (Posting to a Usenet newsgroup and getting an
e-mail reply saying that my mailing list message is being held for
approval, for example.) I think it's a really goo
On Saturday, in article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] "Mike Cox" wrote:
> Woodchuck Bill wrote:
>
> > Mike Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> >
> >> I cannot handle the volume of email that a mailing list would place
> >> on my
> >> inbox.
> >
> > Ever
27 matches
Mail list logo
