Re: Adding PGInstaller to the Downloads section - Mailing list pgsql-www
| From | Magnus Hagander |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Adding PGInstaller to the Downloads section |
| Date | |
| Msg-id | CABUevEy87tXDmeq8Be+S78Rb8AHQkgk6gJ-jMKfk8sX5kfKhOQ@mail.gmail.com Whole thread Raw |
| In response to | Re: Adding PGInstaller to the Downloads section (Umair Shahid <umair.shahid@2ndquadrant.com>) |
| Responses |
Re: Adding PGInstaller to the Downloads section
(Umair Shahid <umair.shahid@2ndquadrant.com>)
|
| List | pgsql-www |
On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 8:13 PM Umair Shahid <umair.shahid@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 1:20 AM Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:Hi,
On 10/8/18 9:11 AM, Umair Shahid wrote:
>
>
> Hi. Any updates on this?
>
> If there is specific feedback on how to make this patch better, please
> let me know. Thanks!
We're sorry this is taking some time to get to - with the major release
and some other larger pgweb projects, in addition to some of the
discussion on how to set this up, we have not been able to prioritize
it. We will get to this in the weeks after the PG11 launch.
Our plan is to focus on doing some restructuring on the downloads page -
which there appears to be consensus - before adding additional
installers. Getting this done will allow us to add the installers
shortly, if not immediately, after.Thank you for the explanation Jonathan, though I am not sure I quite get it. The Downloads page needs restructuring, which apparently needs to be done regardless of whether Postgres Installer is listed there. I don't understand why Postgres Installer should be held up because of it.We moved quickly to address all concerns raised in the first round. It sends a rather discouraging message from the community if I find out about this decision more than a month after I sent the revised patch, and that too after repeated reminders.I believe this puts Postgres Installer at a disadvantage, and without good reason. I would urge you to kindly reconsider. Thanks!
Hi!
It's not about putting any of the installers at an advantage or at a disadvantage. It is whether we put our *users* at an advantage or a disadvantage, and the consensus on that is pretty clear -- we are not doing our users any service by having a whole bunch of different installers on the same page without a clear and working structure. And yes, adding more options without structure and clearness to the end user on which should be used for what, will be of negative value. What we have now does not "scale", and piling more on it just makes it work.
Thus, we need to work on that structure first. Unfortunately, there seems to be a distinct lack of people willing to work on *that* part, so it takes longer.
It is definitely true that you have worked quickly to address the problems that were there with the patch initially, and that is definitely appreciated. But just like with PostgreSQL itself, that's no guarantee that it will get in.
It's just like the main PostgreSQL sourcecode -- we don't apply patches even though the author updates them quickly based on comments if it's determined that they are counterproductive to the bigger goal of the product. It's the same here, just for the website.