> > Regardless of who is managing them, surely the person in charge of > it should be on this list to be able to answer questions etc. > > > You're suggesting the person in charge of the EDB website should be on > this mailing list on the off-chance we decide to have a discussion about > adding an API or file to the EDB site? That seems excessive, given this > or anything like it has happened once in 15+ years.
No, so they can be part of the conversation period so we don't have to wait for some intra-company communication/process to take place.
Well on that basis, perhaps you could subscribe to the pgadmin-hackers mailing list just in case we decide we need something from you in a few years?
Yes, that's a facetious suggestion, but I don't think it's far from what's being asked.
> > And I'm sure they have the technical skills to publish a json file > even without your oversight :) > > > Of course they do. The question is one of prioritising the work, which > unless it's an issue with the download pages not working etc. I have > very little sway over.
Th solution would be to move these downloads to the PGDG infrastructure and not have to wait on a company that makes it's money off Postgres getting around to prioritizing supporting Postgres.
There was no "getting around to prioritizing supporting Postgres". The installers were published and available on time, and the people doing that work updated everything they've ever been asked to. Moving downloads to PGDG infrastructure would not have avoided the problem being discussed at all; the pages that needed updating would still need to be updated by someone, through some mechanism that doesn't involve having commit rights on the website repo and doesn't currently exist.
