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
Re: Three weeks left until feature freeze Re: Three weeks left until feature freeze Re: Three weeks left until feature freeze |
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: