From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca>, "Jeroen T(dot) Vermeulen" <jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, Thomas Swan <tswan(at)idigx(dot)com>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: postgresql.net vs. |
Date: | 2004-03-12 18:36:47 |
Message-ID: | 11654.1079116607@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-www |
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)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
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2004-03-12 18:38:22 | Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: postgresql.net vs. |
Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2004-03-12 18:35:02 | Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: postgresql.net vs. |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2004-03-12 18:38:22 | Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: postgresql.net vs. |
Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2004-03-12 18:35:02 | Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: postgresql.net vs. |