Thread: Let's get the OpenSCG packages listed on download
-WWW, In reviewing: http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAKq0gv+Gc0i8j=ktQSkMkLJmmTqUHAm=Eza7zLv+MdXCB6H+Bw@mail.gmail.com It becomes clear that they are following the Open Source way in a more transparent fashion that the other universal packages available. I would like to see them added to here: http://www.postgresql.org/download/windows/ and http://www.postgresql.org/download/macosx/ Sincerely, JD -- Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/ +1-503-667-4564 PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development. Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
> On 25 Apr 2016, at 20:05, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote: > > -WWW, > > In reviewing: > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAKq0gv+Gc0i8j=ktQSkMkLJmmTqUHAm=Eza7zLv+MdXCB6H+Bw@mail.gmail.com > > It becomes clear that they are following the Open Source way in a more transparent fashion that the other universal packagesavailable. In what way exactly? I can't even find the source code on the website. The existing installers are on git.postgresql.org. The other thing to be very careful of is confusing users. Are these distributions interchangeable? What happens if a usertries to upgrade one with the other?
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote: > On 04/26/2016 12:04 AM, Dave Page wrote: >> >> >> >>> On 25 Apr 2016, at 20:05, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote: >>> >>> -WWW, >>> >>> In reviewing: >>> >>> >>> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAKq0gv+Gc0i8j=ktQSkMkLJmmTqUHAm=Eza7zLv+MdXCB6H+Bw@mail.gmail.com >>> >>> It becomes clear that they are following the Open Source way in a more >>> transparent fashion that the other universal packages available. >> >> >> In what way exactly? I can't even find the source code on the website. The >> existing installers are on git.postgresql.org. >> >> The other thing to be very careful of is confusing users. Are these >> distributions interchangeable? What happens if a user tries to upgrade one >> with the other? >> > > Good questions! My first question was directed at you, as you made the assertion: Why are these packages clearly more transparent and following the Open Source way than the EDB packages? - It's not clear they are Open Source. - If you try to download, you get hit with a "Register Here" page, far more in your face than I think the EDB installers have ever had (they did have once, but it was off to one side - and is long gone nowadays). - The logo linking to OpenSCG's site to offer PostgreSQL services is the PostgreSQL logo, not the OpenSCG one, which is misleading. - On the other hand, the EDB page, whilst it does link to EDB products and services, also has large, bold back-links to postgresql.org resources, and makes it pretty clear what is EDB and what is .org. - The installers themselves have similar commercial branding to the EDB ones (e.g. "PostgreSQL, packaged by ...") - Both distributions use the same non-OSS installer technology. So why do you make the assertion above? What am I missing? -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 3:04 AM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
> On 25 Apr 2016, at 20:05, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>
> -WWW,
>
> In reviewing:
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAKq0gv+Gc0i8j=ktQSkMkLJmmTqUHAm=Eza7zLv+MdXCB6H+Bw@mail.gmail.com
>
> It becomes clear that they are following the Open Source way in a more transparent fashion that the other universal packages available.
In what way exactly? I can't even find the source code on the website. The existing installers are on git.postgresql.org.
Looks like an oversight, we're opening up the repo now.
The other thing to be very careful of is confusing users. Are these distributions interchangeable? What happens if a user tries to upgrade one with the other?
That's the beauty of our update manager, It's consistent across platforms and makes updates a snap. That being said, our testing includes using each set of binaries against data directories created with different installers.
--Scott
--
Sent via pgsql-www mailing list (pgsql-www@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-www
Dave Cramer
On 26 April 2016 at 10:21, Scott Mead <scottm@openscg.com> wrote:
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 3:04 AM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
> On 25 Apr 2016, at 20:05, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>
> -WWW,
>
> In reviewing:
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAKq0gv+Gc0i8j=ktQSkMkLJmmTqUHAm=Eza7zLv+MdXCB6H+Bw@mail.gmail.com
>
> It becomes clear that they are following the Open Source way in a more transparent fashion that the other universal packages available.
In what way exactly? I can't even find the source code on the website. The existing installers are on git.postgresql.org.Looks like an oversight, we're opening up the repo now.
The other thing to be very careful of is confusing users. Are these distributions interchangeable? What happens if a user tries to upgrade one with the other?That's the beauty of our update manager, It's consistent across platforms and makes updates a snap. That being said, our testing includes using each set of binaries against data directories created with different installers.
Are you building PL/R ? This is particularly problematic for windows as it requires the same version of R to be on the host system as what was used to build it.
Dave
On 04/26/2016 07:15 AM, Dave Page wrote: >> Good questions! > > My first question was directed at you, as you made the assertion: Why > are these packages clearly more transparent and following the Open > Source way than the EDB packages? > > - It's not clear they are Open Source. I believe that is being fixed right now per Scott. > > - If you try to download, you get hit with a "Register Here" page, far > more in your face than I think the EDB installers have ever had (they > did have once, but it was off to one side - and is long gone > nowadays). I don't know that if it is "far more in your face" because there really isn't much on that page at all except: Your download will begin shortly and yes, a register option. But that seems more like an overall design issue. On the other hand, the OpenSCG website is far faster to respond than the EDB one :P > > - The logo linking to OpenSCG's site to offer PostgreSQL services is > the PostgreSQL logo, not the OpenSCG one, which is misleading. Ugh, you are correct. The way that is presented is very poor. Scott, Jim? We shouldn't have: "Sponsor Services" PostgreSQL and have it go to your services. It needs to be worded better. Perhaps? Packages sponsored by OpenSCG services? Or something like that. > th distributions use the same non-OSS installer technology. > > So why do you make the assertion above? What am I missing? > Well first, this isn't about EDB to me. I was going purely off what was presented which was the 100% open source. As a community we have long agreed that if an Open Source alternative exists, that is the one that gets promoted and it should. If OpenSCG isn't presenting the solution in the manner described in their announce that either needs to be fixed or, I agree... there is no reason to list them because we don't want to confuse users. Lastly, I am not suggesting we remove the packages but I definitely think something like this is appropriate (assuming OpenSCG fixes a few things): Windows Download @ OpenSCG (Open Source) Windows Download @ EnterpriseDB (Closed Source) That said, let's not turn this into a roaring backyard fire. Let's see if OpenSCG can get some of this resolved first. Sincerely, JD -- Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/ +1-503-667-4564 PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development. Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
Windows Download @ OpenSCG (Open Source)
Windows Download @ EnterpriseDB (Closed Source)
How do you see EDB as closed source ? The source is available as are the installers ?
Dave
On 04/26/2016 07:51 AM, Dave Cramer wrote: > > > > Windows Download @ OpenSCG (Open Source) > Windows Download @ EnterpriseDB (Closed Source) > > How do you see EDB as closed source ? The source is available as are the > installers ? Where? If so, awesome and we should make sure that is linked. JD > > Dave > > -- Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/ +1-503-667-4564 PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development. Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
<p dir="ltr"><br /> On Apr 26, 2016 4:53 PM, "Joshua D. Drake" <<a href="mailto:jd@commandprompt.com">jd@commandprompt.com</a>>wrote:<br /> ><br /> > On 04/26/2016 07:51 AM, DaveCramer wrote:<br /> >><br /> >><br /> >><br /> >><br /> >> Windows Download @ OpenSCG(Open Source)<br /> >> Windows Download @ EnterpriseDB (Closed Source)<br /> >><br /> >> Howdo you see EDB as closed source ? The source is available as are the<br /> >> installers ?<br /> ><br /> ><br/> > Where? If so, awesome and we should make sure that is linked.<br /> ><p dir="ltr">It's on <a href="http://git.postgresql.org">git.postgresql.org</a>.<p dir="ltr">The downside is that it requires a proprietary closedsource tool to build. Can't recall if it's free or if you also have to pay for it. <p dir="ltr">But the custom codefor the installers is there. <p dir="ltr">/Magnus <br />
On 04/26/2016 07:55 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > Where? If so, awesome and we should make sure that is linked. > > > > It's on git.postgresql.org <http://git.postgresql.org>. > > The downside is that it requires a proprietary closed source tool to > build. Can't recall if it's free or if you also have to pay for it. Are we talking Visual Studio? > > But the custom code for the installers is there. Well that's cool. TIL! We should fix the download page to reflect that in some way even if: Source Available here: ..... Note: Visual Studio required to build Or something like that. I think most Windows users recognize that even open source will have to be compiled with closed source tools but the fact that the source is even available is news to me and I don't know if that is fair to EDB. Sincerely, JD -- Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/ +1-503-667-4564 PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development. Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
<p dir="ltr"><br /> On Apr 26, 2016 4:59 PM, "Joshua D. Drake" <<a href="mailto:jd@commandprompt.com">jd@commandprompt.com</a>>wrote:<br /> ><br /> > On 04/26/2016 07:55 AM, MagnusHagander wrote:<br /> ><br /> >> > Where? If so, awesome and we should make sure that is linked.<br />>> ><br /> >><br /> >> It's on <a href="http://git.postgresql.org">git.postgresql.org</a> <<ahref="http://git.postgresql.org">http://git.postgresql.org</a>>.<br /> >><br /> >><br /> >> Thedownside is that it requires a proprietary closed source tool to<br /> >> build. Can't recall if it's free or ifyou also have to pay for it.<br /> ><br /> ><br /> > Are we talking Visual Studio?<p dir="ltr">No, the stuff frombitnami. You still need visual studio to build the binaries, but not the installer. <p dir="ltr">/Magnus
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 4:05 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > > On Apr 26, 2016 4:59 PM, "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote: >> >> On 04/26/2016 07:55 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> >>> > Where? If so, awesome and we should make sure that is linked. >>> > >>> >>> It's on git.postgresql.org <http://git.postgresql.org>. >>> >>> >>> The downside is that it requires a proprietary closed source tool to >>> build. Can't recall if it's free or if you also have to pay for it. >> >> >> Are we talking Visual Studio? > > No, the stuff from bitnami. You still need visual studio to build the > binaries, but not the installer. Which is the same tech used by OpenSCG - largely because there are no decent OSS alternatives that work cross-platform. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Scott Mead <scottm@openscg.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 3:04 AM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> > On 25 Apr 2016, at 20:05, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote: >> > >> > -WWW, >> > >> > In reviewing: >> > >> > >> > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAKq0gv+Gc0i8j=ktQSkMkLJmmTqUHAm=Eza7zLv+MdXCB6H+Bw@mail.gmail.com >> > >> > It becomes clear that they are following the Open Source way in a more >> > transparent fashion that the other universal packages available. >> >> In what way exactly? I can't even find the source code on the website. The >> existing installers are on git.postgresql.org. > > > Looks like an oversight, we're opening up the repo now. >> >> >> The other thing to be very careful of is confusing users. Are these >> distributions interchangeable? What happens if a user tries to upgrade one >> with the other? > > > That's the beauty of our update manager, It's consistent across platforms > and makes updates a snap. As does ours, as you know. That being said, our testing includes using each > set of binaries against data directories created with different installers. Is that safe, given the compiler differences? BTW - I was somewhat concerned to see outbound HTTP connections being made during installation without my consent or knowledge (bar the fact I was intentionally monitoring). What gives? -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
BTW - I was somewhat concerned to see outbound HTTP connections being
made during installation without my consent or knowledge (bar the fact
I was intentionally monitoring). What gives?
The BigSQL installer downloads pgAdmin or PostgreSQL Studio if those optional components are selected during the install (and the component description says the component requires a download). And it downloads the up-to-date list of packages available for update through the update manager.
--
David Rader - VP Product Development
e: davidr@openscg.com | m: 732-887-8140
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 10:38 AM, Dave Cramer <davecramer@gmail.com> wrote:
Dave CramerAre you building PL/R ? This is particularly problematic for windows as it requires the same version of R to be on the host system as what was used to build it.Dave
PL/R is on our high priority list for Windows and is currently included for Linux.
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
On 04/26/2016 07:15 AM, Dave Page wrote:
- The logo linking to OpenSCG's site to offer PostgreSQL services is
the PostgreSQL logo, not the OpenSCG one, which is misleading.
Ugh, you are correct. The way that is presented is very poor. Scott, Jim? We shouldn't have:
"Sponsor Services"
PostgreSQL
and have it go to your services. It needs to be worded better. Perhaps?
Packages sponsored by OpenSCG services? Or something like that.
Agreed - we'll update that to be clearer.
th distributions use the same non-OSS installer technology.
So why do you make the assertion above? What am I missing?
Well first, this isn't about EDB to me. I was going purely off what was presented which was the 100% open source. As a community we have long agreed that if an Open Source alternative exists, that is the one that gets promoted and it should.
If OpenSCG isn't presenting the solution in the manner described in their announce that either needs to be fixed or, I agree... there is no reason to list them because we don't want to confuse users.
We weren't focused on the specific installer tech as OSS as all of the packages and integrations and pre-req's for users being open source. No ActiveState required. All extensions available in the open source version. Command line update manager open source.
FYI, the (open source) command line update manager is actually much more than that, and does the install and configuration. We are using Bitnami mostly for the .zip file and graphic UI, but most of the setup, service integration, etc is done by the command line tool, so if you download the sandbox version (without graphical installer) you can still run the install command to install and configure.
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Rader, David <davidr@openscg.com> wrote:
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:On 04/26/2016 07:15 AM, Dave Page wrote:
- The logo linking to OpenSCG's site to offer PostgreSQL services is
the PostgreSQL logo, not the OpenSCG one, which is misleading.
Ugh, you are correct. The way that is presented is very poor. Scott, Jim? We shouldn't have:
"Sponsor Services"
PostgreSQL
and have it go to your services. It needs to be worded better. Perhaps?
Packages sponsored by OpenSCG services? Or something like that.Agreed - we'll update that to be clearer.
Updating this list - we cleaned up the download page - changed to sponsored by logo "OpenSCG"; removed the newsletter signup since we haven't put out a newsletter in a looong time; added the installer project and public repo link to the sponsored projects page. I think that's all the feedback items addressed, let me know if we missed one.
-Dave
On 04/28/2016 11:43 AM, Rader, David wrote: > > > Updating this list - we cleaned up the download page - changed to > sponsored by logo "OpenSCG"; removed the newsletter signup since we > haven't put out a newsletter in a looong time; added the installer > project and public repo link to the sponsored projects page. I think > that's all the feedback items addressed, let me know if we missed one. The new procedure looks fantastic! I especially love how I can click on which components are being used, where to get them separately etc... This is a much better community but sponsored feel to it. Nice job. Sincerely, JD -- Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/ +1-503-667-4564 PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development. Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
On 28 Apr 2016, at 19:43, Rader, David <davidr@openscg.com> wrote: <snip> > Updating this list - we cleaned up the download page - changed to sponsored by logo "OpenSCG"; removed the newsletter signupsince we haven't put out a newsletter in a looong time; added the installer project and public repo link to the sponsoredprojects page. I think that's all the feedback items addressed, let me know if we missed one. With the Components page: http://www.bigsql.org/se/components.jsp In the "Client Connectors" section at the bottom, there seems to be the MS Windows flag logo being used, and a "Microsoft .net" graphic too. Are they ok like that? Doing a quick search online for MS logo programs allowing the use of those specific ones, didn't show up anything obvious. I could have just missed something though. :) Only asking because MS are known to be funny about people using their logo's sometimes. If this isn't an issue though, no worries. :) Regards and best wishes, Justin Clift -- "My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the first group; there was less competition there." - Indira Gandhi
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> wrote:
On 28 Apr 2016, at 19:43, Rader, David <davidr@openscg.com> wrote:
<snip>
With the Components page:
http://www.bigsql.org/se/components.jsp
In the "Client Connectors" section at the bottom, there seems to be
the MS Windows flag logo being used, and a "Microsoft .net" graphic
too. Are they ok like that?
Thanks Justin - good suggestion.
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 03:15:17PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> My first question was directed at you, as you made the assertion: Why
> are these packages clearly more transparent and following the Open
> Source way than the EDB packages?
>
> - It's not clear they are Open Source.
>
> - If you try to download, you get hit with a "Register Here" page, far
-------------
> more in your face than I think the EDB installers have ever had (they
> did have once, but it was off to one side - and is long gone
------------
> nowadays). --------
Oh no it's not!
The pages we link to from the postgresql.org website to download the EDB
installers starts on first access with a popup with this text:
Register for Free
Learn from community leaders Download free white papers Watch free webcasts
Hearabout PostgreSQL news
Register For Free
You have to close the popup to access the downloads. There is also a
request at the top to allow browser cookies for this site, which will
prevent the popup from appearing in the future.
You can reproduce this by going to our download page (e.g.
http://www.postgresql.org/download/windows/) from a private browser that
has no history of what pages you have visited (e.g. Firefox "New Private
Window") and clicking on "Download".
Is this acceptable? How long has it been this way?
The page that appears after the download seems fine as it has a survey.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 6:38 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 03:15:17PM +0100, Dave Page wrote: >> My first question was directed at you, as you made the assertion: Why >> are these packages clearly more transparent and following the Open >> Source way than the EDB packages? >> >> - It's not clear they are Open Source. >> >> - If you try to download, you get hit with a "Register Here" page, far > ------------- >> more in your face than I think the EDB installers have ever had (they >> did have once, but it was off to one side - and is long gone > ------------ >> nowadays). > -------- > > Oh no it's not! > > The pages we link to from the postgresql.org website to download the EDB > installers starts on first access with a popup with this text: > > Register for Free > > Learn from community leaders > Download free white papers > Watch free webcasts > Hear about PostgreSQL news > > Register For Free > > You have to close the popup to access the downloads. There is also a > request at the top to allow browser cookies for this site, which will > prevent the popup from appearing in the future. > > You can reproduce this by going to our download page (e.g. > http://www.postgresql.org/download/windows/) from a private browser that > has no history of what pages you have visited (e.g. Firefox "New Private > Window") and clicking on "Download". > > Is this acceptable? How long has it been this way? > > The page that appears after the download seems fine as it has a survey. The register popup is not supposed to be present on that page (and when it was first added, it wasn't - I checked myself). EDB Webteam, please fix this *immediately*. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 6:46 PM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: > >> You can reproduce this by going to our download page (e.g. >> http://www.postgresql.org/download/windows/) from a private browser that >> has no history of what pages you have visited (e.g. Firefox "New Private >> Window") and clicking on "Download". >> >> Is this acceptable? How long has it been this way? >> >> The page that appears after the download seems fine as it has a survey. > > The register popup is not supposed to be present on that page (and > when it was first added, it wasn't - I checked myself). > > EDB Webteam, please fix this *immediately*. This has been fixed - apologies for any inconvenience. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 11:03:41AM +0100, Dave Page wrote: > On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 6:46 PM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: > > > >> You can reproduce this by going to our download page (e.g. > >> http://www.postgresql.org/download/windows/) from a private browser that > >> has no history of what pages you have visited (e.g. Firefox "New Private > >> Window") and clicking on "Download". > >> > >> Is this acceptable? How long has it been this way? > >> > >> The page that appears after the download seems fine as it has a survey. > > > > The register popup is not supposed to be present on that page (and > > when it was first added, it wasn't - I checked myself). > > > > EDB Webteam, please fix this *immediately*. > > This has been fixed - apologies for any inconvenience. I can confirm it has been fixed. Also, that page lists "9.6 beta 1" at the top: http://www.enterprisedb.com/products-services-training/pgdownload#windows Should it be clearer? e.g. 9.6beta1 has text: Installer version Version 9.6 Beta 1 [ This is a beta release fortesting purposes, and should not be used in production ] while 9.5 has: Installer version Version 9.5.3 [Readme file for customers interested inusing PL/Perl, PL/Python or PL/Tcl] -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +