On Tue, 7 Jan 2003, Dan Langille wrote:
> On 7 Jan 2003 at 16:25, mlw wrote:
>
> > I think banner ads that build on PostgreSQL's message is a good thing.
> > A RedHat ad, maybe IBM, etc. Companies with a related purpose to the
> > PostgreSQL mission will offset some of the cost and help build the
On 7 Jan 2003 at 16:25, mlw wrote:
> I think banner ads that build on PostgreSQL's message is a good thing.
> A RedHat ad, maybe IBM, etc. Companies with a related purpose to the
> PostgreSQL mission will offset some of the cost and help build the
> cedibility of the site.
>
> Hotel ads and sweep
Tom Lane wrote:
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Please understand something here ... a large portion of the banner ads are
*not* paid ... they are recognition of the many mirror sites that are
supporting the project by reducing the amount of bandwidth that is
requi
I know I participate on this group periodically, but my last position was
CTO at a company, and I currently run my own consulting company. I feel I
have a pretty neutral perspective.
I don't see what the fuss is all about. Banner adds are good, if the PostgreSQL
can get some good RELEVANT adds
On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, Neil Conway wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 13:26, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, mlw wrote:
> > > The PHP site shows adds.
>
> Ok -- but the vast majority (say, 95%) of OSS sites don't show ads.
Guess that makes us part of the elite 5% that do, eh? You had m
On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 13:26, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, mlw wrote:
> > The PHP site shows adds.
Ok -- but the vast majority (say, 95%) of OSS sites don't show ads.
> And I just checked ... so does Sourceforge ...
Not on project websites, though.
In any case, I'd be fine with
On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >
> > > Marc G. Fournier writes:
> > >
> > > > I'm just announcing here, since I'd like to see some ppl testing this out
> > > > and let us know if there are
On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, Scott Lamb wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > I'm just announcing here, since I'd like to see some ppl testing this out
> > and let us know if there are any problems ... DNS is going to take a
> > little while to propogate, so the old site may still come up in the
> > interiu
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
I'm just announcing here, since I'd like to see some ppl testing this out
and let us know if there are any problems ... DNS is going to take a
little while to propogate, so the old site may still come up in the
interium ... another reason not to announce it right away :)
On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> > Marc G. Fournier writes:
> >
> > > I'm just announcing here, since I'd like to see some ppl testing this out
> > > and let us know if there are any problems ... DNS is going to take a
> > > little while
On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier writes:
>
> > I'm just announcing here, since I'd like to see some ppl testing this out
> > and let us know if there are any problems ... DNS is going to take a
> > little while to propogate, so the old site may still come up in the
>
On 6 Jan 2003 at 18:44, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> If the banner ads (as previously stated) do not bring in much revenue,
> is there a reason to keep them?
This has been mentioned more than once AFAIK. It is in "payment" to
those who have provided mirror services.
--
Dan Langille : http://www.l
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
>> The PHP site shows adds.
>
> And I just checked ... so does Sourceforge ...
Sourceforge is not a good example: they are not a organization of open
source people, but a a site owned by a company (OSDN, Inc.) which
in turn is owned by another com
Marc G. Fournier writes:
> I'm just announcing here, since I'd like to see some ppl testing this out
> and let us know if there are any problems ... DNS is going to take a
> little while to propogate, so the old site may still come up in the
> interium ... another reason not to announce it right a
On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, mlw wrote:
> The PHP site shows adds.
And I just checked ... so does Sourceforge ...
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
Neil Conway wrote:
On Sun, 2003-01-05 at 17:15, Dave Page wrote:
There were always ads there
Yes -- but AFAIK there were in the process of being phased out
(furthermore, the old site only had ads on the initial mirror page,
whereas they are much more widespread on the
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Any volunteers to act as a tertiary? :)
We're actually working on adding a new server online that is offshore,
which will also give us another subnet to work off of ... but having a
third-party secondary server wouldn't hurt, you are right ...
OK, add 64.46.156.80 as
The site looks fantastic! Great work!
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
I'm just announcing here, since I'd like to see some ppl testing this out
and let us know if there are any problems ... DNS is going to take a
little while to propogate, so the old site may still come up in the
interium ... another re
I'll do it on my site.
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Any volunteers to act as a tertiary? :)
We're actually working on adding a new server online that is offshore,
which will also give us another subnet to work off of ... but having a
third-party secondary server wouldn't hurt, you are right ...
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
'K, but that won't help the mirrors themselves ... what we need to do is
pull the users-lounge over to the new VM next ...
Do you have access to 64.49.215.8?
.9 works for me, but .8 doesn't.
:-(
Regards and best wishes,
Justin Clift
---(end
On Sun, 2003-01-05 at 20:32, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> Not even close ... in fact, most of the banners there are in recognition
> of those companies who themselves have provided invaluable resources for
> the project by providing mirror sites, to reduce the overall traffic hits
> on the central ser
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Please understand something here ... a large portion of the banner ads are
> *not* paid ... they are recognition of the many mirror sites that are
> supporting the project by reducing the amount of bandwidth that is
> required on the central server .
On 5 Jan 2003, Neil Conway wrote:
> Obviously, but it's VERY unprofessional for us to show ads to users on
> our website. It goes without saying, but pretty much every other
> non-trivial OSS project doesn't have ads on their main website.
> Displaying ads makes us look more like a Geocities site
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Neil Conway wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2003-01-05 at 17:15, Dave Page wrote:
> > > > There were always ads there
> > >
> > > Yes -- but AFAIK there were in the process of being phased out
> > > (furthermore, the old site only had a
On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Neil Conway wrote:
> > On Sun, 2003-01-05 at 17:15, Dave Page wrote:
> > > There were always ads there
> >
> > Yes -- but AFAIK there were in the process of being phased out
> > (furthermore, the old site only had ads on the initial mirror page,
> > where
Neil Conway wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-01-05 at 17:15, Dave Page wrote:
> > There were always ads there
>
> Yes -- but AFAIK there were in the process of being phased out
> (furthermore, the old site only had ads on the initial mirror page,
> whereas they are much more widespread on the new site).
>
>
On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sun, 2003-01-05 at 18:05, Dave Page wrote:
> >> Don't get me wrong, I personnally would prefer to remove them, however
> >> unless we get suitable corporate sponsorship the servers still have to
> >> be paid for s
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, 2003-01-05 at 18:05, Dave Page wrote:
>> Don't get me wrong, I personnally would prefer to remove them, however
>> unless we get suitable corporate sponsorship the servers still have to
>> be paid for somehow.
> Granted. I'm just trying to point ou
On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Dave Page wrote:
> Don't get me wrong, I personnally would prefer to remove them, however
> unless we get suitable corporate sponsorship the servers still have to
> be paid for somehow. Purely speculation, but I would guess that the ads
> are not recouping all of the cash it co
On Sun, 2003-01-05 at 18:05, Dave Page wrote:
> Don't get me wrong, I personnally would prefer to remove them, however
> unless we get suitable corporate sponsorship the servers still have to
> be paid for somehow.
Granted. I'm just trying to point out that putting ads on our webspace
is a pretty
> -Original Message-
> From: Neil Conway [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 05 January 2003 22:38
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: Marc G. Fournier; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] New Portal in Place, DNS switched ...
>
>
> On Sun, 2003-01-05 at 17:15, Dave
On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Neil Conway wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-01-05 at 17:15, Dave Page wrote:
> > There were always ads there
>
> Yes -- but AFAIK there were in the process of being phased out
Not sure where you heard this from ... there were some site that still
hadn't had them deployed on them, but th
On 5 Jan 2003, Neil Conway wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-01-05 at 17:15, Dave Page wrote:
> > There were always ads there
>
> Yes -- but AFAIK there were in the process of being phased out
> (furthermore, the old site only had ads on the initial mirror page,
> whereas they are much more widespread on the
On Sun, 2003-01-05 at 17:15, Dave Page wrote:
> There were always ads there
Yes -- but AFAIK there were in the process of being phased out
(furthermore, the old site only had ads on the initial mirror page,
whereas they are much more widespread on the new site).
> they help pay for the boxes.
Ob
> -Original Message-
> From: Neil Conway [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 05 January 2003 22:03
> To: Marc G. Fournier
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] New Portal in Place, DNS switched ...
>
>
> On Sat, 2003-01-04 at 19:40, Marc G. F
On Sat, 2003-01-04 at 19:40, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> I'm just announcing here, since I'd like to see some ppl testing this out
> and let us know if there are any problems
Why are there ads on the page?
Cheers,
Neil
--
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC
---
> -Original Message-
> From: Marc G. Fournier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 05 January 2003 21:06
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: Rod Taylor; PostgreSQL-development
> Subject: RE: [HACKERS] New Portal in Place, DNS switched ...
>
>
> On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Dave P
> -Original Message-
> From: Marc G. Fournier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 05 January 2003 21:03
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: Tom Lane; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [webmaster] [HACKERS] New Portal in Place, DNS
> switched ...
>
>
On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> AFAICT none of the www mirrors have updated yet; that's starting to
> >> seem suspicious.
>
> > the www mirrors don't update from the portal,they update from what is no
On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Dave Page wrote:
> Umm, Marc? Is that a mnogo search.cgi? What do you want to do about it -
> move it or lose it?
Move it, but its going to require some fixing up ... let's disable it for
now and re-enable it once we've had some time to get it back in order?
-
On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Dave Page wrote:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: 05 January 2003 20:34
> > To: Marc G. Fournier
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] New Portal in Place, DNS
On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Rod Taylor wrote:
> Two thoughts:
>
> Are there any plans to 'strip' the users lounge of duplicated
> information? (outdated news, various links, etc.).
Yes ...
> Will advocacy, gborg, archives, techdocs, etc. be updated to include
> links back to the portal site?
Yes ...
> > Will advocacy, gborg, archives, techdocs, etc. be updated to
> > include links back to the portal site?
>
> Don't they already?
If they do, it's not obvious. I don't see anything on archives,
advocacy, or gborg. It looks like techdocs goes to the users lounge
(PostgreSQL Home).
--
Rod Ta
> -Original Message-
> From: Rod Taylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 05 January 2003 20:42
> To: Marc G. Fournier
> Cc: PostgreSQL-development
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] New Portal in Place, DNS switched ...
>
>
> Two thoughts:
>
> Are there any
> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 05 January 2003 20:34
> To: Marc G. Fournier
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] New Portal in Place, DNS switched ...
>
>
> "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PR
Two thoughts:
Are there any plans to 'strip' the users lounge of duplicated
information? (outdated news, various links, etc.).
Will advocacy, gborg, archives, techdocs, etc. be updated to include
links back to the portal site?
BTW, the 'Users Lounge' search link is broken.
http://www.postgresq
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
>> AFAICT none of the www mirrors have updated yet; that's starting to
>> seem suspicious.
> the www mirrors don't update from the portal,they update from what is now
> the users-lounge area ...
But they aren't.
On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> AFAICT none of the www mirrors have updated yet; that's starting to
> seem suspicious.
the www mirrors don't update from the portal,they update from what is now
the users-lounge area ... the portal itself isn't meant to be mirrors, as
its pretty much complete
AFAICT none of the www mirrors have updated yet; that's starting to
seem suspicious.
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
Hi Marc,
Just tested it! it seemes that the address for the french flag is wrong:
http://www.fr.postgresql.org/www.postgresql.org instead of just
www.fr.postgresql.org.
Regards,
On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 01:51:58 + (UTC)
> From: Marc G. Fournier <[EM
Looks like your firewall needs to allow TCP/53 connections from me as well.
I'm getting RST's.
(BTW, TCP/53 can be used for large queries, so it should be allowed
globally).
LER
--On Sunday, January 05, 2003 12:59:42 -0400 "Marc G. Fournier"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 5 Jan 2003,
--On Sunday, January 05, 2003 12:59:42 -0400 "Marc G. Fournier"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Larry Rosenman wrote:
--On Sunday, January 05, 2003 12:52:11 -0400 "Marc G. Fournier"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Any volunteers to act as a tertiary? :)
Sure, I have 2 NS's on
On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Larry Rosenman wrote:
>
>
> --On Sunday, January 05, 2003 12:52:11 -0400 "Marc G. Fournier"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > Any volunteers to act as a tertiary? :)
> Sure, I have 2 NS's on my network with good upstream connectivity (UUNET,
> SPRINT,
> GENUITY, C&W, SAVVI
--On Sunday, January 05, 2003 12:52:11 -0400 "Marc G. Fournier"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Any volunteers to act as a tertiary? :)
Sure, I have 2 NS's on my network with good upstream connectivity (UUNET,
SPRINT,
GENUITY, C&W, SAVVIS).
(207.158.72.11/207.158.72.45).
Let me know what the pr
Any volunteers to act as a tertiary? :)
We're actually working on adding a new server online that is offshore,
which will also give us another subnet to work off of ... but having a
third-party secondary server wouldn't hurt, you are right ...
On Sun, 5 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> ---
> -Original Message-
> From: Justin Clift [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 05 January 2003 13:22
> To: Peter Mount
> Cc: Marc G. Fournier; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] New Portal in Place, DNS switched ...
>
>
> Peter Mount wrote:
> >
> -Original Message-
> From: Peter Mount [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 05 January 2003 12:28
> To: Marc G. Fournier
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] New Portal in Place, DNS switched ...
>
>
> On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Marc G. Fournier
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Speaking of DNS, we should probably not put all of our eggs
in one basket (subnet):
$ whois postgresql.org
> ...
> Domain servers in listed order:
>
> NS.HUB.ORG 64.49.215.5
> NS2.HUB.ORG 64.49.215.6
It wou
Peter Mount wrote:
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
I'm just announcing here, since I'd like to see some ppl testing this out
and let us know if there are any problems ... DNS is going to take a
little while to propogate, so the old site may still come up in the
interium ... another
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
> I'm just announcing here, since I'd like to see some ppl testing this out
> and let us know if there are any problems ... DNS is going to take a
> little while to propogate, so the old site may still come up in the
> interium ... another reason not
Justin Clift <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It's fixed now. :-)
Better, thanks.
Minor suggestion: could we get ALT text for all the flags? Right now
it's there for USA, UK, Italy, but not the rest ...
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)--
Hi Tom,
Sorry about that. Was a combo of two simple problems.
It's fixed now. :-)
Regards and best wishes,
Justin Clift
Tom Lane wrote:
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
the portal itself is not mirrored, butif you go to, for instance
UsersLounge or Downloads, it then gives
On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Justin Clift wrote:
> www.postgresql.org/doc -> www.ca.postgresql.org/users-lounge/
If we can avoid it, let's ... if I recall correctly, we originally set
that up in order to get around some issues we had with originally moving
over to the new site way way back ...
-
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
the portal itself is not mirrored, butif you go to, for instance
UsersLounge or Downloads, it then gives you the option of which mirror to
go to ...
Ah. But if I do either, I see
War
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > the portal itself is not mirrored, butif you go to, for instance
> > UsersLounge or Downloads, it then gives you the option of which mirror to
> > go to ...
>
> Ah. But if I do either, I see
>
> Warning: pg_e
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> the portal itself is not mirrored, butif you go to, for instance
> UsersLounge or Downloads, it then gives you the option of which mirror to
> go to ...
Ah. But if I do either, I see
Warning: pg_exec(): supplied argument is not a valid PostgreSQL
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'm just announcing here, since I'd like to see some ppl testing this out
> > and let us know if there are any problems ... DNS is going to take a
> > little while to propogate, so the old site may still come
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm just announcing here, since I'd like to see some ppl testing this out
> and let us know if there are any problems ... DNS is going to take a
> little while to propogate, so the old site may still come up in the
> interium ... another reason not t
I'm just announcing here, since I'd like to see some ppl testing this out
and let us know if there are any problems ... DNS is going to take a
little while to propogate, so the old site may still come up in the
interium ... another reason not to announce it right away :)
69 matches
Mail list logo
