Re: [pgsql-www] New Mailing List : pgsql-gui-dev@postgresql.org ? - Mailing list pgsql-www
| From | Gevik Babakhani |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: [pgsql-www] New Mailing List : pgsql-gui-dev@postgresql.org ? |
| Date | |
| Msg-id | 160C6681-1829-4DD1-B59F-0B0E09D5F692@postgresql.nl Whole thread Raw |
| In response to | Re: [pgsql-www] New Mailing List : pgsql-gui-dev@postgresql.org ? (Damien Clochard <damien@dalibo.info>) |
| List | pgsql-www |
+1
Gevik Babakhani
github: https://github.com/blendsdk
twitter: @gevik, @blendjs
> On 29 Nov 2017, at 16:07, Damien Clochard wrote:
>
> Le 29.11.2017 15:37, Stephen Frost a écrit :
>> Magnus, all,
>> * Magnus Hagander (magnus@hagander.net) wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>> > On 29 November 2017 at 20:29, Damien Clochard wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > I'm sorry to insist but my original message was a month ago and I have no
>>> > > idea how to proceed...
>>> >
>>> > Back in 2004, there was huge interest in setting up a special list to
>>> > discuss PITR. We did, then everyone waited for me to write the
>>> > feature.
>>> >
>>> > As a result we said "no more special purpose lists".
>>> >
>>> > If anybody is actually planning to write emails to this list, why not
>>> > start writing them now? Why wait?
>>> >
>>> > Just use the prefix "GUI". If we get enough people writing emails and
>>> > code, then maybe a special list is worth having.
>>> I think that the core difference is that pitr was basically a subset of
>>> -hackers. (as was the win32-hackers list, which I believe was around the
>>> same time)
>>> My understanding at least is that the target audience for a "gui list" has
>>> very little overlap with the target audience for the hackers list, right?
>> I'm a bit concerned about adding yet-another-mailing-list too, and I'll
>> point to 'pgsql-cluster-hackers' as an even more recent case where we
>> added a list and it ended up dying off.
>> Now, it's a good point that cluster-hackers is also just another subset
>> of -hackers, and perhaps gui-dev is enough different that it won't
>> suffer from this issue, but I have to ask this:
>> What of pgadmin-hackers ? That list certainly gets traffic on it
>> regularly as it's being actively developed, but are people expecting
>> that traffic to move to this new list? If not, why not? If it's
>> because there's not enough commonality between pgadmin and whatever the
>> list is for, then I'm confused as to the point of the list. If the idea
>> is to move the pgadmin-hackers traffic over to this new list, then that
>> would settle my concerns that it ends up being a dead list.
>> If there's other active projects that need lists to facilitate the
>> development of the project, then that also seems more likely to be used
>> moving forward, but having one general list for what seems like a bunch
>> of independet projects strikes me as a bit odd, especially when the one
>> I'm most familiar with (pgadmin) is going to continue to be
>> independent (if that's the case, which I'm guessing it is..).
>
> Hi !
>
> If we had only a handful of graphic tools for Postgres, I would definitely agree with you. But so far we have identified 60 developers actively working on 35 different tools. Diversity is a chance for open source projects but at this level of fragmentation it begins to hurt everyone : developpers are wasting time and code on the same issues, same needs.
>
> Our goal is not to unify every projects into one but we need a space to discuss about common APIs, compare charting libraries, frameworks, common libraries, standard JSON outputs, common design principles, shared experiences, etc.
>
> You are right that this list could end up being a dead list. I cannot estimate how much traffic it will receive. But I am positive that it is clearly not a subset of psql-hackers or any other list, or at least most of the 60 developers we have identified are not active on any other mailing lists of the community.
>
> --
> Damien Clochard
>