Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Time to work on Press Release 8.0

From: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>,Chris Travers <chris(at)travelamericas(dot)com>,Lamar Owen <lowen(at)pari(dot)edu>, olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk,Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>,"Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>,Dan Langille <dan(at)langille(dot)org>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Time to work on Press Release 8.0
Date: 2004-08-14 18:45:45
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-advocacy
On Sat, 14 Aug 2004, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

> Jan Wieck wrote:
>> Now fortunately, this spartanic tarball isn't what most users will
>> get if they select PostgreSQL in their OS distribution installer. So
>> the question would rather be *what is our recommendation for package
>> maintainers?* That collection is what hopefully most end users will
>> experience as the PostgreSQL database product, and that is the
>> picture we have to draw in our release announcement.
> Take a look at, say, KDE or GNOME.  Their software is split up in all
> kinds of ways.  Each little program has its own maintainer, version
> number, etc.  Yet, to the general public it surely seems like KDE and
> GNOME are pretty integrated.  Why is that?
> It's because above all these small parts there is an umbrella
> organization that provides services to each small part to make them
> look integrated, such as:
> - release management
> - security issue management
> - localization support
> - documentation support
> - bug tracking
> - packaging support
> - marketing support
> ... and more.
> We don't provide those services.  Back in the days when everything was
> one tarball, we provided those services in an integrated fashion by
> default, but I can understand why that system doesn't work beyond a
> certain size.  But by gborg or pgfoundry we don't provide these
> services either.  A developer that makes use of gborg basically just
> rents machine space and bandwidth with some preinstalled software that
> allows him to set up the above mentioned services for his own project.
> But that doesn't make it integrated.
> So, for the issue at hand, no matter how much we like replication,
> endorse slony, or respect Jan's work, it's not part of PostgreSQL, in
> the eyes of the public.  And a press release or three isn't going to
> fundamentally change that, because the facts don't back it up.

Do we not make some headway towards that with the work on pgxs?  I realize 
that only addresses part of the problem, but it does make a start ...

How do we continue to 'bridge the gap', so to say?

pginstaller does, I think, a good job of it on the Windows platform, by 
giving one interface to pull in multiple 'tools' ... any way of mirroring 
this sort of thing in Unix?

Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664

In response to


pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2004-08-14 18:56:21
Subject: Re: Time to work on Press Release 8.0
Previous:From: Steve BergmanDate: 2004-08-14 18:29:27
Subject: Re: 8.0 Press Release: the PRODUCTIVE thread.

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group