From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Joshua Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | Selena Deckelmann <selenamarie(at)gmail(dot)com>, w^3 <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: categorizing mailing lists |
Date: | 2008-09-02 16:42:22 |
Message-ID: | 20080902164222.GH12610@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-www |
Joshua Drake escribió:
> On Tue, 2 Sep 2008 10:34:21 -0400
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > Selena Deckelmann escribió:
> > What do people think about creating a new category (list group) and
> > sticking pgus-general and pgeu-general on it? What should that
> > category be named?
>
> Well it depends on what the purpose of the new category is.
> PostgreSQLFR for example, where would that go? It isn't technically a
> user group but is also a non profit. ITPUG is a little easier as it is
> a user group and a non profit.
The purpose of the new category is to be able to categorize the lists
better. If you are suggesting it to be named "Non profit" I think
that's a nonstarter, because all the other lists are not-for-profit too.
What I want is the categories to keep some relationships with the
descriptions we're going to give the lists. So for PUGs we would use a
geographical region name (so the okpug list would be described as
"Oklahoma", etc). For "regional lists" we would use a language name (so
pgsql-de-allgemein should be described as "German" or maybe "Deutsch").
If you're proposing to move pgus-general and pgeu-general under "User
Groups", that's fine with me too.
PostgreSQLFR and ITPUG have nothing to do here, because they're not
hosted on our archives site.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Guillaume Lelarge | 2008-09-02 17:36:17 | Re: categorizing mailing lists |
Previous Message | Joshua Drake | 2008-09-02 16:31:27 | Re: categorizing mailing lists |