Re: [HACKERS] Upcoming PG re-releases

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-www-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
> [mailto:pgsql-www-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Marc G. Fournier
> Sent: 01 December 2005 17:01
> To: Peter Eisentraut
> Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org; Euler Taveira de Oliveira;
> Richard Huxton; Robert Treat; Magnus Hagander; Marc G.
> Fournier; pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org; Tom Lane; Andrew Dunstan
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] [HACKERS] Upcoming PG re-releases
>
> On Thu, 1 Dec 2005, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> > Am Donnerstag, 1. Dezember 2005 11:35 schrieb Euler Taveira
> de Oliveira:
> >> What about an museum.postgresql.org to keep the old releases?
> >
> > That gave me a good laugh, but there is something to be
> said about moving all
> > no longer supported releases (according to the criteria
> that are being
> > discussed) to an unmirrored site, say, archive.postgresql.org.
>
> That would be fairly trivial ... let me add it to the 'todo
> list' ... I
> take it that it would be safe to relegate the /pub/source/OLD
> stuff there
> too?

Not so trivial to put behind a web interface or the download tracker
though. Is it really necessary to have a separate archive downloads
site? It's not like the old ones get in the way, or cost anything other
than disk space on the mirrors to store (and I've only ever heard mirror
admins say how small our site is compared to many others!).

Plus of course, weren't we trying to reduce the number of VMs/sites?

Regards, Dave.