On 7/13/06, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> No, the correct way to say that is "if major components were included in
> the readily-available distributions of Postgres" then newbies would find
> it easier to find them.
OK, I agree. Damn semantics :)
> That doesn't lead to concluding that we should redefine "core"
> as "everything that's popular".
Alright, but I believe we should at least work together when planning
a release to make a set recommendation to packagers.
> These days I don't believe that many newbies download and
> compile the core PG source distribution
Totally agreed. I have been meaning that our packages (non-src)
should have common tools with them.
> For those who are actually downloading stuff directly from
> http://www.postgresql.org/download/, that page already does list most
> of the add-ons that have been mentioned in this thread.
> Perhaps we need to adjust the wording to make it clearer ...
Yes, that would probably help some.
> One really trivial change is that the second sentence says "full
> package" where it ought to say "core package" --- we should consistently
> reinforce the idea that you're getting a database core, not everything
> that you might want to go with it.
Agreed.
--
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/
