Re: Important Info on comp.databases.postgresql.general

From: Marcel Beaudoin <mbeauINVALID(at)sympaINVALIDtico(dot)ca>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Important Info on comp.databases.postgresql.general
Date: 2004-11-09 20:41:35
Message-ID: Xns959C9E0596951mbeausympaticoca@130.133.1.4
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Woodchuck Bill <bwr607(at)hotmail(dot)com> wrote in
news:Xns959C804EC266Abswr607h4(at)130(dot)133(dot)1(dot)4:

> OK, so you think it is acceptable for anyone to create as many Big-8
> rogue groups as they like? Some servers will carry the groups, others
> will not. There should be no accountability for someone doing this.
> There is nothing wrong with it.

I think that the question is will the "rogue" groups being created do a
significant amount of damage to the rest of usenet that a UDP is warranted.
In this case, recommending a UDP for a set of groups that is, from what I
can tell, pretty much self-contained, sorta like using a shotgun to open a
peanut. It does the job but is way out of scale.
--
Marcel

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mike Cox 2004-11-09 20:42:01 I'm about to release the next postgresql RFD. Comments wanted.
Previous Message John Stanley 2004-11-09 20:41:31 Re: Important Info on comp.databases.postgresql.general