Re: Three weeks left until feature freeze - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jonah H. Harris
Subject Re: Three weeks left until feature freeze
Date
Msg-id 36e682920607130803t2b7755ddg6878e371a63316cf@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Three weeks left until feature freeze  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Responses Re: Three weeks left until feature freeze  (Rod Taylor <pg@rbt.ca>)
Re: Three weeks left until feature freeze  ("A.M." <agentm@themactionfaction.com>)
Re: Three weeks left until feature freeze  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Re: Three weeks left until feature freeze  ("Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 7/13/06, Lukas Smith wrote:
> However I do think that PostgreSQL is missing out in
> getting new users aboard that are in the early stages
> of evalutation and simply only consider features that
> they get along with a default installation (mostly due
> to lack of better knowledge about places like pgfoundry).

This is my point exactly.  As with many things, we keep skirting the
real issue by going with an "improve the smaller component" approach
such as "promote pgfoundry more".  I have never seen this approach
work, but maybe someone has an example of another OSS project that has
successfully excluded major components like this?

No matter what we want people to do, if someone wants PostgreSQL, they
go to PostgreSQL's site, download PostgreSQL, and install PostgreSQL.
The fact is, most people generally don't read the, "don't see it in
the distribution, check out pgfoundry"-like text.  Sure, people should
read the docs, but most don't until they have to (which is long after
getting the software).  Do we even have anything in the actual manual
that talks about gborg or pgfoundry?

> For these kinds of users it would make sense to provide
> a distro that has an extended feature list, while sacrificing
> maybe a tiny bit of stability

I don't see it as less stable at all.  If someone needs functionality
(and doesn't just decide to get a different RDBMS that has it
included), they're going to get the pgfoundry project anyway... so
whether we include it in the distro is seemingly irrelevant from a
stability standpoint.  What we should say is something to the effect
of, "this version of [pgfoundry project X] has been tested
successfully with PostgreSQL x.x.x."  The core distro has nothing to
do with the add-ons which are inevitably added by the user after the
fact... but at least we wouldn't lose potentially new users.

My question is, what is the packagers' stance on this topic?  It seems
like more work for them than for anyone else.

-- 
Jonah H. Harris, Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1300
EnterpriseDB Corporation            | fax: 732.331.1301
33 Wood Ave S, 2nd Floor            | jharris@enterprisedb.com
Iselin, New Jersey 08830            | http://www.enterprisedb.com/


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Lukas Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: Three weeks left until feature freeze
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Three weeks left until feature freeze