Re: [HACKERS] Release cycle length - Mailing list pgsql-www

----- Original-Nachricht -----
Von: "Michael Glaesemann" <grzm@myrealbox.com>
An:  <webmaster@letzplay.de>
CC: neilc@samurai.com, scrappy@postgresql.org, pgsql-www@postgresql.org
Datum: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 01:32 PM
Betreff: [pgsql-www] [HACKERS] Release cycle length

> On Tuesday, November 18, 2003, at 05:13 PM, Andreas Grabmüller wrote:
>
> > ----- Original-Nachricht -----
> > Von: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>
> > An: Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>
> > CC: pgsql-www@postgresql.org, PostgreSQL Development
> > <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
> > Datum: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 05:06 AM
> > Betreff: [pgsql-www] [HACKERS] Release cycle length
> >
> >> On Mon, 17 Nov 2003, Neil Conway wrote:
> >>
> >>> That said, I'm not really sure how we can make better use of the beta
> >>> period. One obvious improvement would be making the beta
> >>> announcements
> >>> more visible: the obscurity of the beta process on www.postgresql.org
> >>> for 7.4 was pretty ridiculous. Does anyone else have a suggestion on
> >>> what we can do to produce a more reliable .0 release in less time?
> >>
> >> Agreed ... here's a thought ...
> >>
> >> take the download page and break it into two pages:
> >>
> >> page 1: broken down into "dev" vs "stable" versions, including the
> >> date of
> >> release ...
> >>
> >> page 2: when you click on the version you want to download, it brings
> >> you
> >> to a subpage that is what the main page currently is (with all the
> >> flags
> >> and such) but instead of just sending ppl to the ftp site itself,
> >> actually
> >> have the link go to the directory that contains that version on the
> >> mirror
> >> site ...
> >>
> >> that first page of the download could contain descriptoins of the
> >> variosu
> >> releases, and state of releases?
> >>
> >> ---------------------------(end of
> >> broadcast)---------------------------
> >> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
> >
> > We could also use some download page similar to the one on
> > httpd.apache.org - first you select a mirror (and one near you has
> > been preselected) and under it you get a list of possible downloads...
> > might be easier for the users than browsing through FTP...
>
>  From a users' standpoint, do you think the users are looking for a
> mirror or for software? Maybe put the download first, then a selection
> of mirrors. I haven't done a lot of downloading, so my perspective
> might be a little off. And advantage of the mirror > download order
> would be if people are downloading more than one item at a time. Then
> they wouldn't have to go back to choose another download. However, once
> they choose the mirror (and commence the download) a page could come up
> offering the option to download more from this mirror.
>
> Just some thoughts.
> Michael

Have you looked at the apache download site? I think it's goot (of course, we can put the mirror chooser under the
downloadlinks - it doesn't matter for the functionality as always a different (random?) server gets preselected
automatically...

Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Andreas Grabmüller

--
LetzPlay.de
| Freemail:       http://www.letzplay.de/mail
| Forenhosting: http://www.letzplay.de/foren