We could perhaps do something similar to the Apache 1.3 win platform
notes, where they (still) say *something* like :
"Apache on windows is not as stable as on unix... but is being actively
improved all the time"
This is a bit more positive than "it's dangerous!".
As for people not reading the release notes - we could display the
platform note (or an href to it) prominently on the download page
("they" may still not read that...but it has become a matter of choice
at that point...).
regards
Mark
David Garamond wrote:
> Robert Treat wrote:
>
>> Given that the cygwin version is currently labeled as not ready for
>> production I would say you are right. The truth is that many will never
>> declare win32 good for production simply because of the OS it runs on,
>> but we still want to make it as solid as possible.
>
>
> People _do_ use postgresql+cygwin in production environments though
> (see the pgsql-cygwin archive).
>
> And I suspect people _will_ use 7.5 for win32 in production, despite
> the release notes and the website clearly saying it's not production
> ready. Why?
>
> 1) The version number is "7.5" and many people will presume the ports
> are more or less equal in quality/maturity since they have the same
> version number;
>
> 2) People don't read release notes. See the various reviews on the
> recently released Fedora Core 2, complaining about how it doesn't
> support MP3 or DVD playback, despite the [legal] issues having been
> known and documented since Red Hat 8. Strangely enough, these people
> (who don't read release notes) _do_ write public reviews. They will
> badmouth PostgreSQL, saying it's unstable, crashes a lot, MySQL being
> much much more rock solid, etc etc.
>
> I suggest we label the win32 port as "7.5 ALPHA" or "7.5 DANGEROUS" :-)
>
