Re: About the partial tarballs - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Marko Karppinen
Subject Re: About the partial tarballs
Date
Msg-id 9E1496FE-1496-11D8-8B0E-000A95A6A60A@karppinen.fi
Whole thread Raw
In response to About the partial tarballs  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Responses Re: About the partial tarballs  ("Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>)
Re: About the partial tarballs  (Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 11 Nov 2003, at 20:44, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

> Do we have any data on how many people download the partial tarballs
> (-base, -opt, etc.)?  I have a feeling that more people are confused by
> them than use them.

Even if they weren't useful for anything else, I think there's value in 
the
developers having to consider what is optional and what is not. This 
need
for constant review probably reduces the chance of bloat, over time even
in the full tarball.

I agree that the partial tarballs can confuse an ftp user, though. I 
think
a good solution to this would be to put them one level deeper, into a
subfolder. The full tarball would then be the only thing a casual
user would encounter, but the source-based port systems could still
benefit from the partial tarballs.

mk



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Joe Conway
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Proposal for a cascaded master-slave replication system
Next
From: "Marc G. Fournier"
Date:
Subject: Re: About the partial tarballs