Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
>> At any rate, that's a bit blue sky right now. I haven't seen any
>> disagreement with our kissing "contrib" goodbye as a name, so let's work
>> on that. Unfortunately, that's going to involve a bit of pain,
>>
>
> Yes, I'm not sure I see the point of it. It's got a bad name, but changing
> it is just putting lipstick on a pig. End users don't know, and don't care,
> about contrib. Sysadmins and casual DBAs only care what they can "yum install".
> That only leaves packagers and hard-core developers, both of whom already
> know how contrib works.
>
>
>
If this were at all true we would not not have seen the complaints from
people along the lines of "My ISP won't install contrib". But we have,
and quite a number of times. We have concrete evidence that calling it
contrib actually works against us.
It's also worth pointing out that WE HAVE HAD THIS DISCUSSION BEFORE.
Sometimes I get rather frustrated by our habit of turning time into a
circle and running Groundhog Day.
cheers
andrew
