Re: apt.postgresql.org django app for www.postgresql.org

On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 10:31 AM Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org> wrote:

> Re: Dave Page
> > I spent a bunch of time playing with this, as I intend to get repo
> > browsing for both Yum and Apt onto the website.
> >
> > There was quite a bit of work to do to get it working with modern
> versions
> > of Django and Python 3. Once I got through enough of that to start
> looking
> > at the actual functionality what I found was *really* comprehensive.
> > Unfortunately I think there's actually far more there than we should put
> on
> > the main website.
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> thanks for picking this up.
>
> It's well possible that I overshot the goal when I picked this up from
> Adrian and put more and more info into it.
>

:-)

>
> > - I think the QA section is clearly something that's aimed at you as
> > maintainers of the apt repos. This definitely doesn't belong on the main
> > website in my opinion.
>
> Yeah that could go.
>
> > - The madison interface is also interesting (academically), but I think
> is
> > of little use to the vast majority of our users; I'm not even sure that
> the
> > majority of Debian/Ubuntu users would know about rmadison.
>
> I'm using that daily on the Debian archive, and it would help me a lot
> if it were there. But we don't have to link it from every page, it's
> just some API endpoint, we don't have to confuse users by linking to
> it.
>
> > - Similarly, I think the binary and source package pages are far more
> > comprehensive than most of our users need or would care about.
> >
> > One of the biggest barriers of adoption to PostgreSQL is the perceived
> > complexity, including that of getting it up and running. That's why I'm
> > spending a lot of time at the moment trying to simplify and clarify the
> > download and installation processes. I think what we have in this patch
> > will simply be information overload for most of our users.
>
> Ack. We can probably merge the source and binary views into a single
> (bigger) page with less clutter that users would reach by default. We
> can still have the detailed pages linked from that for users that need
> to know the details. I'm sure we can find a way to do that that
> doesn't spoil the complexity reduction idea.
>

Yeah. As a side note, the other thing I'm trying to do is be fairly
consistent design-wise between apt, yum and zypp.

>
> > My suggestion is that we incorporate a relatively simple browser into the
> > main website, which allows users to easily browse the available packages
> > and see the details of them.
>
> That'd be about what I said above, I think.
>
> > I already have the repo scanning part of that
> > done for both apt and yum, generating JSON output in a way that can be
> > integrated with our download server sync process, which can load that
> into
> > the website database.
>
> Is that online somewhere?
>

No, but I've attached the WIP scripts. Comments welcome. Note that I've
studiously avoided using any modules or external utilities that are only
available on Debian/Ubuntu. Sample output for Apt looks like:

[
{
"Architecture": "arm64",
"Build": "3.pgdg+1",
"Description": "debug symbols for pg-rage-terminator-9.6",
"Distribution": "sid",
"Filename":
"pool/main/p/pg-rage-terminator/pg-rage-terminator-9.6-dbgsym_0.1.7-3.pgdg+1_arm64.deb",
"Licence": "",
"Maintainer": "Adrian Vondendriesch <adrian(dot)vondendriesch(at)credativ(dot)de>",
"Package": "pg-rage-terminator-9.6-dbgsym",
"Repo": "sid-pgdg-testing",
"Version": "0.1.7"
},
{
"Architecture": "arm64",
"Build": "1.pgdg+1",
"Description": "PostgreSQL management tool - GUI application\npgAdmin
is an open source administration and management tool for the\nPostgreSQL
database. It includes a graphical administration interface, an SQL\nquery
tool, a procedural code debugger and much more. The tool is designed
to\nanswer the needs of developers, DBAs and system administrators
alike.\n\nThis package installs the GUI application.",
"Distribution": "sid",
"Filename": "pool/main/p/pgadmin4/pgadmin4_4.21-1.pgdg+1_arm64.deb",
"Licence": "",
"Maintainer": "Debian PostgreSQL Maintainers <
team+postgresql(at)tracker(dot)debian(dot)org>",
"Package": "pgadmin4",
"Repo": "sid-pgdg-testing",
"Url": "https://www.pgadmin.org/",
"Version": "4.21"
}
]

And for Yum:

[
{
"Architecture": "ppc64le",
"Build": "9.rhel7",
"Description": "pgAgent is a job scheduler for PostgreSQL which may be
managed\nusing pgAdmin.",
"Distribution": "rhel-7",
"Filename":
"9.5/redhat/rhel-7-ppc64le/pgagent_95-3.4.0-9.rhel7.ppc64le.rpm",
"Licence": "PostgreSQL",
"Maintainer": "",
"Package": "pgagent_95",
"Repo": "9.5",
"Url": "http://www.pgadmin.org/",
"Version": "3.4.0"
},
{
"Architecture": "ppc64le",
"Build": "1.f25",
"Description": "The PostgreSQL Audit extension (pgaudit) provides
detailed session\nand/or object audit logging via the standard PostgreSQL
logging\nfacility.\n\nThe goal of the PostgreSQL Audit extension (pgaudit)
is to provide\nPostgreSQL users with capability to produce audit logs often
required to\ncomply with government, financial, or ISO
certifications.\n\nAn audit is an official inspection of an individual's or
organization's\naccounts, typically by an independent body. The information
gathered by\nthe PostgreSQL Audit extension (pgaudit) is properly called an
audit\ntrail or audit log. The term audit log is used in this
documentation.",
"Distribution": "rhel-7",
"Filename":
"9.5/redhat/rhel-7-ppc64le/pgaudit10_95-1.0.5-1.f25.ppc64le.rpm",
"Licence": "BSD",
"Maintainer": "",
"Package": "pgaudit10_95",
"Repo": "9.5",
"Url": "https://www.pgaudit.org",
"Version": "1.0.5"
}
]

>
> > I would support a separate site (probably under apt.enterprisedb.com)
> that
> > supports the level of functionality you have in your patch; and I think
> > much, if not all of the code you currently have could be used for that.
> > This could of course be linked from the main website.
>
> Maintaining two sets of interfaces is probably too much. I think we
> can get the "main" one to work, we just need to remove lots of
> clutter.
>

I have a suspicion that what I think would be appropriate for most of our
users wouldn't be enough for you. Definitely open to discussion though!

>
> > Obviously that should be apt.postgresql.org :-)
>
> That got me for a second. ;)

Yeah, muscle memory :-p

--
Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake

EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com