Thread: Re: 3rd RFD: comp.databases.postgresql (was: comp.databases.postgresql.*)
David Harmon <source@netcom.com> wrote in news:41c44692.42645781@news.west.earthlink.net: > On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 00:29:40 +0000 (UTC) in news.groups, Marc G. > Fournier From: <scrappy@hub.org> wrote, >>The pgsql.* hierarchy is a not a private one, it is a public one >>carried by several of the large usenet servers. > > What are the rules for creating new groups in pgsgl.*? > > Fiat-only by Marc. ;-) -- Bill
Woodchuck Bill wrote: > David Harmon <source@netcom.com> wrote in > news:41c44692.42645781@news.west.earthlink.net: > > >>On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 00:29:40 +0000 (UTC) in news.groups, Marc G. >>Fournier From: <scrappy@hub.org> wrote, >> >>>The pgsql.* hierarchy is a not a private one, it is a public one >>>carried by several of the large usenet servers. >> >>What are the rules for creating new groups in pgsgl.*? >> I believe that is something that would be discussed amongst the community but at this point it probably points to, "if there is a mailing list, there is a corresponding pgsql.* group." Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake >> > > > Fiat-only by Marc. ;-) > -- Command Prompt, Inc., home of PostgreSQL Replication, and plPHP. Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting. +1-503-667-4564 - jd@commandprompt.com - http://www.commandprompt.com Mammoth PostgreSQL Replicator. Integrated Replication for PostgreSQL
Attachment
Re: 3rd RFD: comp.databases.postgresql (was: comp.databases.postgresql.*)
From
Robert McClenon
Date:
On 3 Dec 2004 20:34:36 GMT, Woodchuck Bill <bwr607@hotmail.com> wrote:
>David Harmon <source@netcom.com> wrote in
>news:41c44692.42645781@news.west.earthlink.net:
>
>> On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 00:29:40 +0000 (UTC) in news.groups, Marc G.
>> Fournier From: <scrappy@hub.org> wrote,
>>>The pgsql.* hierarchy is a not a private one, it is a public one
>>>carried by several of the large usenet servers.
>>
>> What are the rules for creating new groups in pgsgl.*?
>>
>>
>
>Fiat-only by Marc. ;-)
I think that the term that is occasionally used is that the hierarchy
has a hierarchy czar. That is the most straightforward way to manage
a hierarchy. I did not say that it was the best or the worst, only
the most straightforward. It doesn't address the question of what
happens if the czar disappears, for instance.
- - Bob McClenon
Re: 3rd RFD: comp.databases.postgresql (was: comp.databases.postgresql.*)
From
"Joeseph P. Blow"
Date:
On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 01:24:46 +0000 (GMT), bhk@dsl.co.uk (Brian
{Hamilton Kelly}) wrote:
>On Saturday, in article
> <tto3r01vijeu2n9ggr6r5pl3p36bcmn1nf@4ax.com>
> robert.mcclenon@verizon.net "Robert McClenon" wrote:
>
>> I think that the term that is occasionally used is that the hierarchy
>> has a hierarchy czar. That is the most straightforward way to manage
>> a hierarchy. I did not say that it was the best or the worst, only
>> the most straightforward. It doesn't address the question of what
>> happens if the czar disappears, for instance.
>
>Seventy-five years' rule by Soviet?
Russia takes over Usenet. Film at eleven.
--
Just your average Joe.
Re: 3rd RFD: comp.databases.postgresql (was: comp.databases.postgresql.*)
From
bhk@dsl.co.uk (Brian {Hamilton Kelly})
Date:
On Saturday, in article
<tto3r01vijeu2n9ggr6r5pl3p36bcmn1nf@4ax.com>
robert.mcclenon@verizon.net "Robert McClenon" wrote:
> I think that the term that is occasionally used is that the hierarchy
> has a hierarchy czar. That is the most straightforward way to manage
> a hierarchy. I did not say that it was the best or the worst, only
> the most straightforward. It doesn't address the question of what
> happens if the czar disappears, for instance.
Seventy-five years' rule by Soviet?
--
Brian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk
"I don't use Linux. I prefer to use an OS supported by a large multi-
national vendor, with a good office suite, excellent network/internet
software and decent hardware support."