Re: Add PostgreSQL 11 to feature matrix page?

> On Jun 6, 2018, at 10:35 AM, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jun 6, 2018, at 9:09 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net <mailto:magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 1:59 AM, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org <mailto:jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Jun 4, 2018, at 7:08 PM, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org <mailto:jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On May 24, 2018, at 10:09 PM, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp <mailto:ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [Moved to pgsql-www]
>>>
>>> Sorry for the slow reply!
>>>
>>>>>> Adding PostgreSQL 11 to the page will give users at-a-glance-dfference
>>>>>> between 11 and previous releases, which could bring clearner image of
>>>>>> 11 to the users.
>>>>>
>>>>> I do like this idea, but there are a few things to consider:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Traditionally, we’ve waited until closer to release (I believe RCs) before
>>>>> putting them up, due to the fact features can change. It is simple to remove
>>>>> features from the feature matrix, but I think it’s part of the final packaging to
>>>>> include the full list of features.
>>>>
>>>> But by definition, all features in beta (at least major ones) are
>>>> freezed and should not be changed unless there's a serious
>>>> technical/none technical issue. So the features in the matrix would
>>>> not be changed we expect. Also one of the purposes of beta is
>>>> encouraging users to test out the beta. Adding to the page will give
>>>> more chances to potential beta testers, I think.
>>>
>>> I don’t disagree. I need to make a test to see if this is possible with
>>> the current pgweb configuration.
>>>
>>> I will make a test on my local copy of pgweb to see how easy it is to add 11
>>> to the list. I will report back if it is easy or not. If the former, I’ll make the suggestion
>>> of adding it to the site and see if there are any objections.
>>
>> So to get this to work we need to follow the standard process of adding in
>> a new version to the feature matrix:
>>
>> 1. Write a migration to support “v11” in the Feature model
>> 2. Add in the new features
>>
>> The one thing currently is that unless something in the code is changed, it
>> displays the full version number (e.g. “11”) without any indication of it being
>> in beta. Experimenting with the code, I don’t think it would be difficult to add
>> that in, but it is non trivial and I may have to change some of the sorting code
>> we are currently using.
>>
>> tl;dr
>>
>> If we’re ok with displaying “11” early without any indication of beta, this is trivial
>> and we just need to create the migration. If not, then it’s a bit of work, but it
>> may be worthwhile.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>>
>> I think it's perfectly fine to show it as 11.
>
> See attached for review. This follows the standard format we have used for
> adding new versions to the feature matrix.

This patch has been applied.

I’ve added a few of the PostgreSQL 11 features into the matrix just to get a basic
list going:

https://www.postgresql.org/about/featurematrix/ <https://www.postgresql.org/about/featurematrix/>

Skimming through it, we may be due for some reorganization and some new
categories, e.g. “Partitioning,” “Indexing” etc.

I can think of some others after looking at it more thoroughly.

Thanks,

Jonathan