this mailing list is proposed to be retired

Some PostgreSQL mailing lists, including the one you are reading now, are
proposed to be retired, because they receive very little or mostly off-topic
traffic.

If you disagree with this proposal, please make your objections known before
the end of the month. Otherwise we will proceed with this plan.

The current first stage of retirement proposals affects the following lists:

* pgsql-ports

In the future, please post issues to one of the following mailing lists:

- Questions on compiling PostgreSQL to pgsql-general
- Complaints if PostgreSQL does not compile to pgsql-bugs
- Porting PostgreSQL to new platforms to pgsql-hackers

* pgsql-cygwin

In the future, please post issues to another mailing list, as described above
for pgsql-ports.

* pgsql-interfaces

Many PostgreSQL interfaces have their own mailing lists. Posts that don't fit
anywhere else could go to pgsql-general.

Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Some PostgreSQL mailing lists, including the one you are reading now, are
> proposed to be retired, because they receive very little or mostly off-topic
> traffic.

> * pgsql-interfaces
>
> Many PostgreSQL interfaces have their own mailing lists. Posts that don't fit
> anywhere else could go to pgsql-general.

We consider that enough time for objections has passed with no
objections being raised, so this list is going to be deleted Real Soon
Now. You Have Been Warned.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> Some PostgreSQL mailing lists, including the one you are reading
>> now, are
>> proposed to be retired, because they receive very little or mostly
>> off-topic
>> traffic.
>
>> * pgsql-interfaces
>>
>> Many PostgreSQL interfaces have their own mailing lists. Posts
>> that don't fit
>> anywhere else could go to pgsql-general.
>
> We consider that enough time for objections has passed with no
> objections being raised, so this list is going to be deleted Real Soon
> Now. You Have Been Warned.

I'm pretty sure I posted when you first proposed killing this list - I
find it both useful and on-topic, and the alternatives less so. I'll
be disappointed if you kill it.

2009/3/25 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> Some PostgreSQL mailing lists, including the one you are reading now, are
>> proposed to be retired, because they receive very little or mostly off-topic
>> traffic.
>
>> * pgsql-interfaces
>>
>> Many PostgreSQL interfaces have their own mailing lists.  Posts that don't fit
>> anywhere else could go to pgsql-general.
>
> We consider that enough time for objections has passed with no
> objections being raised, so this list is going to be deleted Real Soon
> Now.  You Have Been Warned.

I find it amusing that "low traffic" implies some level of
irrelevancy. What a load of tosh. This list has a purpose, it
*serves* that purpose, and does so well. By removing this and
consolidating it with another similarly-related one, you're just going
to contaminate that other list.

-- Thomas Adam

Thomas Adam <thomas(dot)adam22(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I find it amusing that "low traffic" implies some level of
> irrelevancy. What a load of tosh. This list has a purpose, it
> *serves* that purpose, and does so well.

Not counting this thread itself, since January 1 this list has had
22 posts, all but five of which were demonstrably off-topic (assuming
that that Javascript thread in January should have been on pgsql-jdbc).
Of the five, three were a single thread about ECPG, and the other two
were questions that went unanswered. So in other words, there's been
*one* effective, on-topic exchange in three months here, and a much
larger volume of stuff that should have gone somewhere else.

The list looks pretty moribund to me :-(.

regards, tom lane