Re: Idea for a secondary list server

On 02/24/2015 12:57 AM, Dave Page wrote:
>> Having a slew of not used mailing lists would not be beneficial to the
>> > community in general, in my opinion.  Again, the issue is less about
>> > the workload and more about the concern of having far more lists than
>> > make any sense, 90+% of which are essentially dead.
> I agree entirely.

So the alternative is that we'll be running folks through the gauntlet
of justification whenever they ask for a list, and requiring them to
prove the popularity of their project/group/etc. before allocating them
one -- something which is hard to do without having a list in the first
place.

Alternatively, having a secondary list server with external
infrastructure support and an automated termination policy for idle
lists would give us an "incubator" area where people could prove the
viability of their focused sub-communities ... or not.  This would allow
us to NOT spend time arguing on this list over whether a specific group
deserved a list or not.

-- 
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com