Re: Download links

On Saturday 30 August 2008 15:59:41 Dave Page wrote:
> The ordering intentionally puts the easy to use, one size fits all
> above the platform specific packaging. Experience tells us that the
> people that have most trouble figuring out what to download tend to be
> the ones for whom the one-click point and drool packages are the most
> appropriate. The more experienced users are generally able to find the
> 'exact-fit' packages for their distro.

What is concerning me is that the one-click installer is essentially a
proprietary product and it is put into the prominent spot PostgreSQL ->
Download -> Linux -> first choice. Now, basically everyone who wants free
advertisement has to make their own one-click installer and fight with you
for that spot. At the very least, the whole thing should be moved to a
community-hosted infrastructure, an open development model, and no company
advertisement.

(For related reasons, I think the company names on the download pages should
be deleted altogether.)

Also, I would personally never recommend anyone using a non-distro packaged
binary, which is why I am concerned that we are putting this into the
prominent spot. There are good technical reasons for that recommendation.
For example, if you install a nonpackaged version of libpq, none of the other
packages available in your distro that depend on libpq will work. The
explanation you give above is acknowledged but I don't believe it is
accurate. The distro packaging should be the default even for the
non-superguru user.