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

> I don't think we should include everything, and I belive that
> "collapse" is debatable.  The important part is how the distro itself
> is managed.  One can easily create a "core" distribution which
> includes PL/Java, ODBC, JDBC, etc.  All of them don't have to reside
> in the same CVS tree, but they can be built and released together.  I
> know because I've done it... and it's not that difficult.  The hard
> part is actually deciding what to include and what not to.


And people already do this...

The Win32 installer
mammothpostgresql.org (which is 100% FOSS btw)
Ubuntu :)

So why put the load on the Core distro?


> In general, we're talking about well established projects (PL/Java,
> JDBC, ODBC, ...) with a great track record; not someone's personal
> little proof-of-concept hack on pgfoundry.

Well define great track record? Of the three you mention, two of them 
are debatable.

PL/java although from what I can tell is stable but it is still young.

ODBC is a constant problem, I didn't even realize what level of problem 
ODBC could be until we wrote our own driver (READ: I am not blaming the 
ODBC team)

> Like I said, this discussion always seems to come up and we always go
> back to saying "leave it to pgfoundry", "we'll promote pgfoundry",
> "pgfoundry is the best place for it".  Yet, I haven't really seen any
> action to make pgfoundry any better or more well-known.  I asked
> before, is pgfoundry/gborg even mentioned in the documentation?

It is on the website and in the documentation. Albeit not as prominent 
as it could be.

And to be frank, the amount of time any of us has spent on this thread 
could have easily been used to improve the documentation on this 
particular subject.


>> The right way to proceed is what was mentioned in another
>> message: work harder at educating packagers about which
>> non-core projects are worth including in their packages.
> 
> OK, but who is going to do this?  It certainly doesn't sound like any
> of us want to spend the time educating packagers as we're either
> working on our own things or for companies that already do package
> PostgreSQL.

Well honestly this seems like a no-op. The distributions that really 
matter, are going to have packagers that know what is out there. 
Ubuntu/Debian and FreeBSD come to mind first.

> It just seems like we keep having lengthy recurring discussions that
> seem to go nowhere.  No solution is ever reached, we just keep the
> status quo.  Sure, risks either pay off or they don't, but it's just
> as easy to die from stagnation as well.

Haha :) Welcome to FOSS development man :). It is 75% discussions that 
go nowhere, 20% percent that get somewhere (noone actually knows where) 
and 5% that gets done :)

> I wish we could poll the actual end-users and see what their thoughts
> are, because we're sort of thinking in a vacuum here (no pun
> intended).

Well my users expect me to provide their tools, not the community. In 
fact that is one of the most oft questions I get asked: "If we want to 
help PostgreSQL, will you handle it for us".

>
> I can readily accept being wrong; but every once in a while, we just
> need a little innovation.
> 

I don't think innovation is the word your looking for, progress maybe?

The problem is, progress is determined by arbitrary value to which 
everyone has an opinion.

I mean heck... I still think we should introduce new features into back 
branches as long as it doesn't require an initdb but most (including my 
own developers) don't agree with me.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake




-- 
   === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240   Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL
solutionssince 1997             http://www.commandprompt.com/