Re: Policy for expiring lists WAS: Idea for a secondary list server

>> This is a bit more complicated than that. We (PgUS) certainly can
>> set up a mailman instance but even PgUS now uses Gapps + Groups as
>> it is free for a 501c3. I don't know that I can justify spending
>> hard cash for something that is readily available for free. (We
>> would likely be happy to set up Google Groups under the .US domain
>> though).
>
> You've utterly missed the point of what I was suggesting. Mailman lists
> are *not* meetup, sorry.

I am not suggesting mailman is a meetup replacement.

> If .US can support *specifically meetup*, then
> I think we could get a lot farther along the path of having regular
> PUGs because meetup is what people actually use and the meetup based
> PUGs, generally speaking, do quite well.

My point was, I doubt I could convince the board to expense the money
when we have GAPPS including Groups and G+ and Events etc... all for
free via our 501c3 account with Google.

> PUGs that just have a mailing
> list clearly do *not* work out well. If all it took was a mailing list
> then why do we have a bunch of defunct ones? Let's look at the actual
> evidence instead of what we'd like to have happen.

I don't disagree that there are a lot of quiet lists (I also agree that
dumping lists should be something that should be done). I only argue
that creating a list and seeing it if will thrive takes very little
energy and creates a more open environment for the community.

>
>>> Josh, we're not going to be able to provide something like meetup
>>> without a heck of a lot of development resources. If you're offering to
>>> build an OSS meetup replacement then we can certainly talk about hosting
>>> an instance for PUGs.
>>
>> A mailing list + the ability for there to be a PUGS "event" listing
>> would pretty much provide everything a PUG needs.
>
> I look forward to this OSS-implementation of meetup.

We already have it? We have events on the website plus mailing list
capability. O.k. granted, we may want a different PUGs event space, I am
not sure but that is definitely a topic for a different thread.

>
>> The primary topic is a secondary list server because .org is
>> difficult to work with when it comes to mailing lists. I think it is
>> pretty spot on to mention we have also wanted other types of lists.
>
> The pginfra team is *also* part of the advocacy and various other teams,
> including core. Please do not presume that the discussion carried on
> here by members of infrastructure are only from the infrastructure or
> resources standpoint. It is not.

I have no idea to your point here as it has nothing to do with what I said.

JD

--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development
High Availability, Oracle Conversion, @cmdpromptinc

Now I get it: your service is designed for a customer
base that grew up with Facebook, watches Japanese seizure
robot anime, and has the attention span of a gnat.
I'm not that user., "Tyler Riddle"