From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL WWW <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Subject: | Re: Request for project mailing list: pgsql-pkg-docker |
Date: | 2014-07-10 18:38:16 |
Message-ID: | 53BEDD98.6020001@agliodbs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-www |
> It's exactly the kind of discussion that does need to happen, unless
> we're just going to say yes or no to everyone. We're not a general
> hosting provider for anyone who wants it, nor do we have the resources
> to become one.
"Is there demand" is a useful question when creating a list.
"Is project X worthwhile or not" isn't. Namely, my comment was in
response to this:
"Forgive my naive question. How is Docker PostgeSQL useful for real
world use case?"
Such questions, while they would be appropriate for another list
(pgsql-general maybe? The new docker list, if I get access to it?), are
NOT appropriate when discussing whether or not to grant a new list. It
forces requestors to run a gauntlet of different list commentors finding
fault with their project.
Maybe it's past time for us to have a formal set of criteria and process
for requesting new lists, just like we do for other kinds of web stuff
like events? A lot of the arguments here might be avoidable with one.
P.S. Alvaro, if you didn't see my other email, I did not get the
majordomo notification of the new list.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Page | 2014-07-10 18:42:59 | Re: Request for project mailing list: pgsql-pkg-docker |
Previous Message | Dave Page | 2014-07-10 07:55:53 | Re: Request for project mailing list: pgsql-pkg-docker |