Thread: sf.net download page
Somebody needs to update the download pages at sourceforge.net. Or... I'll just throw this one out again. Why don't we remove those ;-) Previously there was actually a reason for it, since they provided http downloads and our own mirror network only provided ftp. But our network now supports both http and ftp downloads, so I don't really see the point of keeping them. And since we have a tradition of updating them weeks or months after the actual releases, let's just drop them? (For the record, they've had about 100 downloads so far this year, compared to about 2.5 million from the main site.) //Magnus
On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 03:24:06PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > keeping them. And since we have a tradition of updating them weeks or > months after the actual releases, let's just drop them? Sounds like a good idea to me. A
Hi, On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 15:24 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > Somebody needs to update the download pages at sourceforge.net. I'm on it. -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ , RHCE PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/
Devrim GÜNDÜZ wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 15:24 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > Somebody needs to update the download pages at sourceforge.net. > > I'm on it. +1 on removing them instead. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
Hi, On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 15:24 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > Or... I'll just throw this one out again. Why don't we remove > those ;-) I don't see any "harm" keeping the tarballs in sf.net. I can maintain it, np. Regards, -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ , RHCE PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 09:43:03 -0800 Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim@commandprompt.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 15:24 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > Or... I'll just throw this one out again. Why don't we remove > > those ;-) > > I don't see any "harm" keeping the tarballs in sf.net. I can maintain > it, np. As long as it is maintained I see no harm either. The problem is insuring it is maintained. IMO it would be great to have the Win32 installer up there too. Joshua D. Drake > > Regards, - -- The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/ Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate SELECT 'Training', 'Consulting' FROM vendor WHERE name = 'CMD' -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHgmj7ATb/zqfZUUQRArJrAJ9wS50qBBEJzOp++tLDGyuHTLM5dgCZAYO6 9QLakHYX27lGz2rVynNHNug= =faJt -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 09:43:03 -0800 > Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim@commandprompt.com> wrote: > >> Hi, > >> On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 15:24 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: >>> Or... I'll just throw this one out again. Why don't we remove >>> those ;-) >> I don't see any "harm" keeping the tarballs in sf.net. I can maintain >> it, np. > > As long as it is maintained I see no harm either. The problem is > insuring it is maintained. IMO it would be great to have the Win32 > installer up there too. Sure, as long as it's maintained. But having just one person doing is not good enough, IMHO (I know, Devrim never sleeps and never goes on vacation, but something could change that..) And the people who do maintain it should update it *every time* something we have on there updates, and do it right away. (as in a couple of days right away, not in a couple of minutes). Traditionally this has not been the case more than once. So. As long as it's maintained, I see no harm either. I also don't see any gain, really. Whereas I see the risk of harm whenever it falls into non-maintenance. What's the actual *gain* of having it there? //Magnus
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:13:23 +0100 Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > So. As long as it's maintained, I see no harm either. I also don't > see any gain, really. Whereas I see the risk of harm whenever it > falls into non-maintenance. Right, which means we need release management. Which we don't have. A release is more than just rolling tarballs. > > What's the actual *gain* of having it there? Visibility. You don't actually think everyone knows what PostgreSQL is do you? :P Joshua D. Drake - -- The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/ Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate SELECT 'Training', 'Consulting' FROM vendor WHERE name = 'CMD' -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHgm0GATb/zqfZUUQRAvfoAKCSP9VyG+HpmiGuGvU+StycImTgmQCeK04z qHndINFdbeHVmEw6c5ehZ8E= =MkAE -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:13:23 +0100 > Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > >> So. As long as it's maintained, I see no harm either. I also don't >> see any gain, really. Whereas I see the risk of harm whenever it >> falls into non-maintenance. > > Right, which means we need release management. Which we don't have. A > release is more than just rolling tarballs. Well, we have management for all the packages going to *our* site. We just have to do it twice to make this work... BTW, just for reference. In the 8.1 branch, we had 8.1.5. And 8.1.11. And nothing in between. And look at: http://sourceforge.net/news/?group_id=9764 and just count how many announcements aren't there. >> What's the actual *gain* of having it there? > > Visibility. You don't actually think everyone knows what PostgreSQL is > do you? :P Visibility with incorrect information? Plus, do people actually look there for it? I'd expect most people to go to Google... Now, if we could somehow make the sf.net site drive off the main sites RSS feeds or something automatically, that'd be a nice thing ;-) Any way to do that? (news + files would be the important parts) //Magnus
Hi, On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 19:20 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > BTW, just for reference. In the 8.1 branch, we had 8.1.5. And 8.1.11. > And nothing in between. ...because I deleted/hide all of the previous releases. -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ , RHCE PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/
Devrim GÜNDÜZ wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 19:20 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> BTW, just for reference. In the 8.1 branch, we had 8.1.5. And 8.1.11. >> And nothing in between. > > ...because I deleted/hide all of the previous releases. Ah. I was confused with pgfoundry where you can't delete :-P But why didn't you delete 8.1.5 in that case? Did you also delete all the news posts? Why? //Magnus
Hi, On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 19:24 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > But why didn't you delete 8.1.5 in that case? I may have missed some of them ;) > Did you also delete all the news posts? No. Probably noone updated the news items. Updating sf.net page takes no longer than 15-20 minutes for all releases. Spending that little time for every 1-2 months does not hurt. Regards, -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ , RHCE PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/
On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 10:01:29AM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > As long as it is maintained I see no harm either. My experience in the database world is that having two data stores that get their data by someone making sure they're in sync is a good way to have stale data in at least one data store. I doubt download locations are a different case. If there were some automatic way of updating this, I'd think it a good idea; but anything that involves humans is automatically prone to the trigger not firing (no disrespect to the humans involved implied). A
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:20:24 +0100 Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > BTW, just for reference. In the 8.1 branch, we had 8.1.5. And 8.1.11. > And nothing in between. And look at: > http://sourceforge.net/news/?group_id=9764 > > and just count how many announcements aren't there. You don't have to convince me that the project on sourceforge lacks management. I agree. Frankly I don't think Devrim is the person for the Job. He is busy enough. If.. this is going to happen we need a team of people to help us along on it. There are certainly other places we could also advertise (like Freshmeat and linuxapps). Point two... this is really a discussion for -advocacy don't you think? > > > >> What's the actual *gain* of having it there? > > > > Visibility. You don't actually think everyone knows what PostgreSQL > > is do you? :P > > Visibility with incorrect information? I repeat.. IF MANAGED. > > Plus, do people actually look there for it? I'd expect most people to newbs. lots of newbs. Joe Blow... where can I find cool open source software.... User Groups l33t dude who smells bad, "Check sourceforge". Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake - -- The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/ Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate SELECT 'Training', 'Consulting' FROM vendor WHERE name = 'CMD' -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHgnBnATb/zqfZUUQRAo/jAKClavPdqaz4TcAA6zuDRoa0TUZmjwCfUiM9 ltaCncyXEcJw+D2BTlfBi08= =/9mH -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Magnus Hagander wrote: > Somebody needs to update the download pages at sourceforge.net. > > Or... I'll just throw this one out again. Why don't we remove those ;-) > Previously there was actually a reason for it, since they provided http > downloads and our own mirror network only provided ftp. But our network now > supports both http and ftp downloads, so I don't really see the point of > keeping them. And since we have a tradition of updating them weeks or > months after the actual releases, let's just drop them? > > (For the record, they've had about 100 downloads so far this year, compared > to about 2.5 million from the main site.) With 100 downloads this year it is hard to argue that it is worth the effort keeping the sourceforge files. Just point them at www.postgresql.org and be done with it. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 15:58:53 -0500 (EST) Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > Magnus Hagander wrote: > > Somebody needs to update the download pages at sourceforge.net. > > > > Or... I'll just throw this one out again. Why don't we remove > > those ;-) Previously there was actually a reason for it, since they > > provided http downloads and our own mirror network only provided > > ftp. But our network now supports both http and ftp downloads, so I > > don't really see the point of keeping them. And since we have a > > tradition of updating them weeks or months after the actual > > releases, let's just drop them? > > > > (For the record, they've had about 100 downloads so far this year, > > compared to about 2.5 million from the main site.) > > With 100 downloads this year it is hard to argue that it is worth the > effort keeping the sourceforge files. Just point them at > www.postgresql.org and be done with it. Consider that it was a 100 downloads, unmaintained. It is a false test of legitimacy. Maintain it, actively for one year, then post the statistics. That is going to be the only way to assess even remotely accurately if it is worth it. Now.. if we don't have the resources, then sure let's dump it. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake - -- The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/ Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate SELECT 'Training', 'Consulting' FROM vendor WHERE name = 'CMD' -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHgpSHATb/zqfZUUQRAmmxAJ9DyYwjblLVIThZQb18NilWmugJCwCeMqYj kgot12IPgyJdbFjFct/LpXM= =Zc46 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 01:07:16PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > Now.. if we don't have the resources, then sure let's dump it. Surely, that the site isn't updated is some _prima facie_ evidence that the resources are lacking, no? A
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 15:58:53 -0500 (EST) > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > > > Magnus Hagander wrote: > > > Somebody needs to update the download pages at sourceforge.net. > > > > > > Or... I'll just throw this one out again. Why don't we remove > > > those ;-) Previously there was actually a reason for it, since they > > > provided http downloads and our own mirror network only provided > > > ftp. But our network now supports both http and ftp downloads, so I > > > don't really see the point of keeping them. And since we have a > > > tradition of updating them weeks or months after the actual > > > releases, let's just drop them? > > > > > > (For the record, they've had about 100 downloads so far this year, > > > compared to about 2.5 million from the main site.) > > > > With 100 downloads this year it is hard to argue that it is worth the > > effort keeping the sourceforge files. Just point them at > > www.postgresql.org and be done with it. > > Consider that it was a 100 downloads, unmaintained. It is a false test > of legitimacy. Well, odds are the people who did those 100 downloads didn't know they were getting old code so my bet is the 100 might have been 1000 maybe 5000 but not a huge number. > Maintain it, actively for one year, then post the statistics. That is > going to be the only way to assess even remotely accurately if it is > worth it. > > Now.. if we don't have the resources, then sure let's dump it. I am suggesting our resources are better spent elsewhere. Linking to our www download page gets us 95% of the benefit for little cost. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 16:05:11 -0500 Andrew Sullivan <ajs@crankycanuck.ca> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 01:07:16PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > > > Now.. if we don't have the resources, then sure let's dump it. > > Surely, that the site isn't updated is some _prima facie_ evidence > that the resources are lacking, no? No :). I liken it to the idea that it is a chore with little perceived benefit and thus you have remind your son 6 times within 10 minutes to actually take out the garbage. The consideration of worth on this topic is based solely on the idea that nobody want to do it and not based on any concrete evidence that it wouldn't be helpful in the advocacy of our project. There is no denying that SourceForge is a huge repository of Free Software nor is there any denying that it is the largest and likely the most searched. That in itself is a benefit but again, it comes back to if someone is going to commit to actually doing the work to prove one way or the other the validity of using Sourceforge as a entry point to new users. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake > > A > > ---------------------------(end of > broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your > friend > - -- The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/ Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate SELECT 'Training', 'Consulting' FROM vendor WHERE name = 'CMD' -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHgpeUATb/zqfZUUQRAndCAJ9pKjMwK9QU3ZWYjP5Av2GEtTS+iACdF3Gu pohZKum2GWImLErCiExFKjQ= =5G2V -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 01:20:20PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > No :). I liken it to the idea that it is a chore with little perceived > benefit and thus you have remind your son 6 times within 10 minutes to > actually take out the garbage. Ah, but taking out the garbage is something that, while nobody likes to do it, everyone acknowledges is important. > The consideration of worth on this topic is based solely on the idea > that nobody want to do it and not based on any concrete evidence that > it wouldn't be helpful in the advocacy of our project. I think you have the burden of proof the wrong way 'round: there's no evidence that continued listing on SF is worth the bother, expecially in the absence of long lines of people standing around asking us whether we have something for them to do. > There is no denying that SourceForge is a huge repository of Free > Software nor is there any denying that it is the largest and likely the > most searched. I will not deny that it is large, nor that it is likely the largest. I do, however, deny, that it is "the most searched", if that is to be relevant to us. I contend that Google is rather more searched. Even Freshmeat seems more likely to me. I, for example, cannot remember the last time I searched anything in SF. To begin with, their search is awful, so I get all sorts of crap I don't want. Google is easier and it gives better results. And PostgreSQL turns up just fine there. More important, I think, is that there is no automatic way to update the SF site that's been proposed. Which means that keeping it up to date will either (1) suck some human's time to do things manually, or not happen perfectly, or (most likely) both. People getting possibly buggy software from a distribution point we treat as a second-class one is surely not the best way for us to introduce them to Postgres, I'd say. A
On Monday 07 January 2008 13:33, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > You don't have to convince me that the project on sourceforge lacks > management. I agree. Frankly I don't think Devrim is the person for the > Job. He is busy enough. > > If.. this is going to happen we need a team of people to help us along > on it. There are certainly other places we could also advertise (like > Freshmeat and linuxapps). > For the record, we have a freshmeat page, and yes, it is outdated as well. http://freshmeat.net/projects/pgsql/ -- Robert Treat Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL