On 11/26/14 12:46 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 2:05 AM, Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org> wrote:
>> You may want to bear in mind that postgres.app is on the main PG
>> downloads page on the website. If you're patching Postgres to add a
>> feature like this, it would become a fork and would have to be moved
>> out of the "PostgreSQL Core Distribution" section of the download area
>> as we only include "pure" distributions there.
>
> Doesn't the existing FreeBSD link go to the ports collection? And
> doesn't the PostgreSQL package automatically use this very ICU patch?
>
> It seems like the FreeBSD people were working around their poor OS
> locale support here. While I think we should officially adopt ICU, it
> seems a little unfair to call what they've done a fork.
I would welcome the addition of support for ICU and possibly other
locale libraries. The features were designed with that in mind.
But I think what is being proposed here needs to be reigned in from time
to time. Search the archives at various times for "debian", "gentoo",
or even "mandrake" for examples of what can happen when this goes too far.
It's a sliding scale. FreeBSD ports are notionally a build-from-source
system targeted as experts. Someone who installs a port has a chance to
look at the port definition and learn what will be installed. (A build
option and a more explicit warning might be nice.) Postgres.app is a
binary distribution apparently targeted at inexperienced or casual users
at a much bigger scale. Users won't have an option to learn about this
unofficial feature or a chance to disable it. Also, Postgres.app is not
the only distribution for this platform, so this could create a lot of
confusion.
It's open source, and I don't want to discourage people from
experimenting and sharing. But I'm with Dave: listing a distribution
among the primary download options should imply that the software is as
pristine as possible.
