Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> No it was a complete distribution. Not it was not point in click well
> except that you could use *standard* tools ;) such as yum/apt etc.. (we
> never did get yum working quite right).
OK
> And breaking package management in the process. I am not trying to start
> a war here, but really, if it was done correctly you would have set up
> and apt server, a yum server etc... which is much more in line with the
> goal I would think.
It doesn't break it, it sits entirely outside of it, allowing it to run
on pretty much any vaguely recent distro. You mention youself that you
never really got Yum to work properly - imagine the effort it would take
to cover all the major distros using the native package management. Even
Devrim's job is complex enough just covering the Redhat distros for the
core server, and pgAdmin at different times.
This is why the likes of Oracle and IBM use similar non-specific
installera.
> But that won't happen. Instead the users will be contained in the bubble
> that is the installer package (any not just EDB) and then when we say,
Better that than they not use PostgreSQL at all.
> download the latest RPMs, debs, use apt, use ports.. whatever, they go
> what? Please repeat.
Our intent is to produce new builds on the community schedule, as well
as additional point releases to pick up new versions of Apache, PHP,
Slony, pgAdmin etc. I can pretty much guarantee they'll be able to
upgrade to a newer version as quickly, if not more quickly than the user
of an OS distribution.
Regards, Dave
