Re: Vote on Windows installer links

Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 08:54 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Josh Berkus wrote:
> > > > I requested we find evidence as a formal poll for the reasons you
> > > > suggest, and others. I would still be happier if this was a formal poll
> > > > rather than as an email from me, but if you would like me to raise this
> > > > on other lists, please confirm that.
> > >
> > > Not really. Again, without an alternate installer team, there's no
> > > point. It doesn't matter how much anyone wants the moon in a box.
> >
> > Agreed. This is not just a download issue, but a larger question of
> > whether we use company resources to help the community if the help has
> > some PR payback for the company.
>
> You asked for evidence that a significant number of people had issues
> with what has been done. You have that now, or do you still dispute
> that?

Your poll was "do you want the moon in a box". Of course we would like
to have installers that appear with no PR at zero cost to us, but that
is not an option, so no, I don't consider your poll valid. Your poll
has confirmed that there is a PR cost for these installers and RPMs, and
that some folks would like a zero-PR-cost option, but I think we all
would like that, so there is little need for a poll to prove it.

> We must now seek a reasonable solution. I see no reason to characterise
> the situation as black/white with all possible alternatives as
> unreachable.

OK, I am trying to move to the grey area by showing that there is not a
"no PR at zero cost" option for us right now.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +