I spoke with Marc from the postgresql mailing list.

#1

He wants to be in the big 8. He would like to be under the comp.databases.*
domain and will not to move it to something like postgresql.*.

So he seems to agree with what was my original intention, which was to make
the current groups proper members of the big 8.

I also offered to let him take over the process as he understands gatewaying
and the details better than I. I also offered to let him create the next
RFD, and hopefully he will agree to do it if he has the time. He is the
most connected member of the postgresql team and it would be right for him
to decide how the groups should be run.

I haven't gotten a response to my email on whether he has the time to take
over the process, but I would like to let you know that I've asked Marc to
design the solution the best way he sees fit, and if he posts a revised RFD,
that one is the one to vote on.

Also, he pointed out that for those who want to get the postgresql groups
when their usenet sever doesn't carry them, the solution would be to point
their newsreaders to news.postgresql.org.

Please, those of you on the mailing list, DO cross post to news.groups.
This is where the news providers, admins, ect. in usenet group creation
meet. It would help tremendously if they are involved in the process.

For those who are unsure of how big 8 newsgroups are created, visit
news.groups. They have a Guidelines for Bigh Eight Newsgroup Creation post
annually. It explains how it works.

#2

On Sun, 7 Nov 2004, Mike Cox wrote:

Quote:

Also, he pointed out that for those who want to get the postgresql
groups when their usenet sever doesn't carry them, the solution would be
to point their newsreaders to news.postgresql.org.

The other point I'd like to make ... we have two mail<->gateways setup, a
second one available at news.fr.postgresql.org, to give us redundancy in
both directions ...

The gateways have *always* been bi-directional, since their first
inception over 4 years ago ...

Finally ... if anyone is running a news server that wishes to get the
hierarchy directly from the source, please email me and we can discuss a
direct link ...

----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy (AT) hub (DOT) org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo (AT) postgresql (DOT) org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

#3

On Sunday, in article <2v7e2fF2h9nkcU1 (AT) uni-berlin (DOT) de>
mikecoxlinux (AT) yahoo (DOT) com "Mike Cox" wrote:

Quote:

Also, he pointed out that for those who want to get the postgresql groups
when their usenet sever doesn't carry them, the solution would be to point
their newsreaders to news.postgresql.org.

Which only confirms my opinion that he's a fuckwit. The concept of
Usenet is NOT that everyone has to read a newsgroup from one particular
server; it's that everyone ought to be able to access any newsgroup from
THEIR own particular most convenient server. Servers exist (and at one
time there were hundreds of thousands of them) specifically to reduce
wasted bandwidth in having everyone and his dog accessing information
that is only in one place, when it could just as easily be in thousands
of places and thereby result in use only of local bandwidth, rather than
international.

(Personally, I blame the original authors of Netscape for incorporating a
news "reader" that could access multiple servers. Before then, most
readers of news had no option other than to read ALL their desired
newsgroups from ONE server, that of their university/employer/ISP. Since
that capability appeared in Netscape, and other browser/newsreaders,
there has been a proliferation of *really* private newsgroups, such as
borland.*; even microsoft.* was originally only available from one
"site".)

--
Brian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk (AT) dsl (DOT) co.uk
"I don't use Linux. I prefer to use an OS supported by a large multi-
national vendor, with a good office suite, excellent network/internet
software and decent hardware support."

#4

On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 16:50:34 -0400 (AST), scrappy (AT) postgresql (DOT) org ("Marc
G. Fournier") wrote:

Quote:

On Sun, 7 Nov 2004, Mike Cox wrote:

Also, he pointed out that for those who want to get the postgresql
groups when their usenet sever doesn't carry them, the solution would be
to point their newsreaders to news.postgresql.org.

The other point I'd like to make ... we have two mail<->gateways setup, a
second one available at news.fr.postgresql.org, to give us redundancy in
both directions ...

The gateways have *always* been bi-directional, since their first
inception over 4 years ago ...

They may be bi-directional but they're still broken. Posts to the
usenet groups get propigated instead of sent to the moderator. That
means they make it to the groups and MAY make it to the list.

Quote:

Finally ... if anyone is running a news server that wishes to get the
hierarchy directly from the source, please email me and we can discuss a
direct link ...

--
gburnore@databasix dot com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
How you look depends on where you go.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary L. Burnore | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³ÝÛºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³

Quote:

ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³ÝÛºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
DataBasix | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³ÝÛºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
ÝÛ³ 3 4 1 4 2 Ý³Þ³ 6 9 0 6 9 ÝÛ³
Black Helicopter Repair Svcs Division | Official Proof of Purchase

================================================== =========================
Want one? GET one! http://signup.databasix.com
================================================== =========================

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

#5

On Sun, 7 Nov 2004, Gary L. Burnore wrote:

Quote:

On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 16:50:34 -0400 (AST), scrappy (AT) postgresql (DOT) org ("Marc
G. Fournier") wrote:

On Sun, 7 Nov 2004, Mike Cox wrote:

Also, he pointed out that for those who want to get the postgresql
groups when their usenet sever doesn't carry them, the solution would be
to point their newsreaders to news.postgresql.org.

The other point I'd like to make ... we have two mail<->gateways setup, a
second one available at news.fr.postgresql.org, to give us redundancy in
both directions ...

The gateways have *always* been bi-directional, since their first
inception over 4 years ago ...

They may be bi-directional but they're still broken. Posts to the
usenet groups get propigated instead of sent to the moderator. That
means they make it to the groups and MAY make it to the list.

If they make it to the gateway, they make it to the moderator and make it
to the lists ... I know this for a fact, because I'm the moderator that
goes through an approves them...

----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy (AT) hub (DOT) org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

#6

Mike Cox <mikecoxlinux (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote in news:2v8it1F2idoh9U1@uni-
berlin.de:

Quote:

Uhh. My head is spinning with the complexity of this. Marc is fine with
being in the big eight official *if* the groups stay the same and it
doesn't affect the mailing list. This will just have to be a bug in the
system if you are correct in that the problem is unsolveable without it
becoming a moderated newsgroup.

That 'bug' might bring some unwanted NO votes your way. I have never voted
against a proposal, but there is a first time for everything.

My suggestions:

-Cut it down to about 3 to 5 groups maximum. A 20-group reorganization of
the comp.databases.* hierarchy is ridiculous. I would be inclined to vote
against it on principle. If you and Marc agree that 20 groups are *really*
necessary, then fine..create the POSTGRESQL hierarchy and notify ISC.

-Propose your second RFD with any added groups as soon as possible.
Remember, your 21-day minimum discussion period will reset as soon as you
add any other groups to the proposal, so figure out which groups are the
most important and propose them ASAP. If the process drags on for too long,
people will start to get annoyed with the process and lose interest. I
speak from experience. I was one of the proponents for a multi group
proposal that started out as a single group proposal.

-Try to get Marc in on the news.groups discussion. Even if he won't become
the primary proponent, he should *at least* weigh in on the proposal. Maybe
you could remain the primary proponent, and Marc would come aboard as a
second? You can have as many proponents as you like. We had six on our
proposal.

--
Bill

#7

In article <20041108.0106.58448snz (AT) dsl (DOT) co.uk>,
bhk (AT) dsl (DOT) co.uk (Brian {Hamilton Kelly}) wrote:

Quote:

newsgroups from ONE server, that of their university/employer/ISP. Since
that capability appeared in Netscape, and other browser/newsreaders,
there has been a proliferation of *really* private newsgroups, such as
borland.*; even microsoft.* was originally only available from one
"site".)

Blaming netscape for microsoft.* is rather funny.

-Mike

#8

Mike Cox <mikecoxlinux (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:

Quote:

I also offered to let him take over the process as he understands gatewaying
and the details better than I. I also offered to let him create the next
RFD, and hopefully he will agree to do it if he has the time. He is the
most connected member of the postgresql team and it would be right for him
to decide how the groups should be run.

He doesn't have to be the primary proponent. Many other proposals
have had multiple proponents, with responsibilities distributed in
a variety of ways. In this case, he could simply be the technical
issues proponent, or topic expert proponent, so to speak.

For example, he might be able to provide you with more charter
info, which would be really helpful given that the groups exist
and that there is probably a decent idea of how the groups seem
to have settled. Then you can write it up, have him check it,
then you can put it in the next RFD.

You can also ask him which are the most popular lists, so that
you can add those to the RFD. That way you can get a good start
on the "official" hierarchy, AND reduce the problem people would
have had in posting to the correct newsgroup for a given postgresql
subtopic.

This way, you can stay on to push the proposal forward, AND the
current moderator is involved to maintain the continuity with
the mailing lists and gateways, both in "official" capacities.

ru

--
My standard proposals rant:
Quality, usefulness, merit, or non-newsgroups popularity of a topic
is more or less irrelevant in creating a new Big-8 newsgroup.
Usenet popularity is the primary consideration.

#9

--- Brian {Hamilton Kelly} <bhk (AT) dsl (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

Quote:

Which only confirms my opinion that he's a fuckwit.

Evidently some of the nastiness out there on Usenet is
propagating into our lists in advance of any change.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
www.yahoo.com

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

#10

On 11/7/2004 8:06 PM, Brian {Hamilton Kelly} wrote:

Quote:

On Sunday, in article <2v7e2fF2h9nkcU1 (AT) uni-berlin (DOT) de
mikecoxlinux (AT) yahoo (DOT) com "Mike Cox" wrote:

Also, he pointed out that for those who want to get the postgresql groups
when their usenet sever doesn't carry them, the solution would be to point
their newsreaders to news.postgresql.org.

Which only confirms my opinion that he's a fuckwit.

And you think that sort of comment makes your opinion welcome here?

I haven't used usenet news for a few years, and I am shocked by the loss
of quality over there. Certain technical groups used to be very much on
the level of politeness and respect, our mailing lists reflect. If this
is what we can expect if we encourage more ISP's to carry our lists,
then I am strictly for "discouraging". Maybe our goal should not be to
make the PostgreSQL lists available by default on every news server.

Jan

--
#================================================= =====================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================= = JanWieck (AT) Yahoo (DOT) com #

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings