Re: 3rd RFD: comp.databases.postgresql (was: comp.databases.postgresql.*)

David Harmon <source(at)netcom(dot)com> wrote in
news:41c44692(dot)42645781(at)news(dot)west(dot)earthlink(dot)net:

> On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 00:29:40 +0000 (UTC) in news.groups, Marc G.
> Fournier From: <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> wrote,
>>The pgsql.* hierarchy is a not a private one, it is a public one
>>carried by several of the large usenet servers.
>
> What are the rules for creating new groups in pgsgl.*?
>
>

Fiat-only by Marc. ;-)

--
Bill

Woodchuck Bill wrote:
> David Harmon <source(at)netcom(dot)com> wrote in
> news:41c44692(dot)42645781(at)news(dot)west(dot)earthlink(dot)net:
>
>
>>On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 00:29:40 +0000 (UTC) in news.groups, Marc G.
>>Fournier From: <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> wrote,
>>
>>>The pgsql.* hierarchy is a not a private one, it is a public one
>>>carried by several of the large usenet servers.
>>
>>What are the rules for creating new groups in pgsgl.*?
>>

I believe that is something that would be discussed amongst the
community but at this point it probably points to, "if there is
a mailing list, there is a corresponding pgsql.* group."

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

>>
>
>
> Fiat-only by Marc. ;-)
>

--
Command Prompt, Inc., home of PostgreSQL Replication, and plPHP.
Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-667-4564 - jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com - http://www.commandprompt.com
Mammoth PostgreSQL Replicator. Integrated Replication for PostgreSQL

On 3 Dec 2004 20:34:36 GMT, Woodchuck Bill <bwr607(at)hotmail(dot)com> wrote:

>David Harmon <source(at)netcom(dot)com> wrote in
>news:41c44692(dot)42645781(at)news(dot)west(dot)earthlink(dot)net:
>
>> On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 00:29:40 +0000 (UTC) in news.groups, Marc G.
>> Fournier From: <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> wrote,
>>>The pgsql.* hierarchy is a not a private one, it is a public one
>>>carried by several of the large usenet servers.
>>
>> What are the rules for creating new groups in pgsgl.*?
>>
>>
>
>Fiat-only by Marc. ;-)

I think that the term that is occasionally used is that the hierarchy
has a hierarchy czar. That is the most straightforward way to manage
a hierarchy. I did not say that it was the best or the worst, only
the most straightforward. It doesn't address the question of what
happens if the czar disappears, for instance.

- - Bob McClenon

On Saturday, in article
<tto3r01vijeu2n9ggr6r5pl3p36bcmn1nf(at)4ax(dot)com>
robert(dot)mcclenon(at)verizon(dot)net "Robert McClenon" wrote:

> I think that the term that is occasionally used is that the hierarchy
> has a hierarchy czar. That is the most straightforward way to manage
> a hierarchy. I did not say that it was the best or the worst, only
> the most straightforward. It doesn't address the question of what
> happens if the czar disappears, for instance.

Seventy-five years' rule by Soviet?

--
Brian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk(at)dsl(dot)co(dot)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."

On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 01:24:46 +0000 (GMT), bhk(at)dsl(dot)co(dot)uk (Brian
{Hamilton Kelly}) wrote:

>On Saturday, in article
> <tto3r01vijeu2n9ggr6r5pl3p36bcmn1nf(at)4ax(dot)com>
> robert(dot)mcclenon(at)verizon(dot)net "Robert McClenon" wrote:
>
>> I think that the term that is occasionally used is that the hierarchy
>> has a hierarchy czar. That is the most straightforward way to manage
>> a hierarchy. I did not say that it was the best or the worst, only
>> the most straightforward. It doesn't address the question of what
>> happens if the czar disappears, for instance.
>
>Seventy-five years' rule by Soviet?

Russia takes over Usenet. Film at eleven.

--
Just your average Joe.