Re: Is there really no interest in SQL Standard?

Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of mar sep 20 10:51:51 -0300 2011:
> On sön, 2011-09-18 at 12:43 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > > On sön, 2011-09-18 at 09:45 -0500, Dave Page wrote:
> > >> That is much more reasonable, though unfortunately not what was said.
> > >> Regardless, I stand by my main point that such a representative should
> > >> be communicating with the project regularly. Having a rep who works
> > >> outside the project is of no use at all.
> >
> > > Well, the point of this thread is, how can she communicate?
> >
> > +1 for a closed mailing list. It's a bit annoying to have to do such
> > a thing, but it's not like we haven't got other closed lists for
> > appropriate purposes.
>
> Well, that much we've already decided a few years ago. The blocking
> issues are: (1) do we have enough interest, and (2) where to put it (I'm
> looking at you, pgfoundry).

I don't see why we wouldn't put it in @postgresql.org.

--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support