| From: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: 7.1 RPMs |
| Date: | 2001-04-14 18:28:11 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.BSF.4.33.0104141527060.72136-100000@mobile.hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 14 Apr 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> writes:
> > If someone wants to come up with an idea for name, i think that the whole
> > Win camp could be seperated also ...
>
> > pgsql-windows and pgsql-rpm ?
>
> A windows list seems like a good idea. But I'm not sure that a
> separate list for RPMs is a good idea. In the first place, it's
> fuzzy: is it to be used just for RPM packaging discussion, or is it
> going to draw off --- for example --- all bug reports from people who
> happen to have installed from RPM instead of source? I suppose the
> former is intended, but it's not going to be clear to people. I think
> we've already got too many lists with fuzzy boundaries. In the second
> place, the RPM packaging discussion is quite sporadic; I think the
> traffic would be nil except at times when Lamar is working on new
> RPMs.
That's why I wasn't sure how to classify the RPM one ...
I like Lamar's suggestion of pgsql-cygwin though ... sound reasonable?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-04-14 18:29:49 | Re: Re: 7.1 RPMs |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-04-14 18:20:42 | Re: Re: 7.1 RPMs |