Re: Updating Sourceforge

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-www <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Updating Sourceforge
Date: 2013-04-12 19:02:27
Message-ID: 20130412190227.GB28228@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-www

On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 08:27:18PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 8:22 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 07:52:08PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 4:13 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:11:45PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> >> What _is_ interesting is that the Sourceforce editors created their own
> >> >> PostgreSQL project page:
> >> >>
> >> >> https://sourceforge.net/projects/postgresql.mirror/
> >> >>
> >> >> that is being updated --- I see 9.2.4 updated on 2013-04-04, which was
> >> >> our release date, and I even see download stats from that date forward.
> >> >>
> >> >> What I did just now was to mark 'pgsql' as moved to 'postgresql.mirror';
> >> >> unfortunately the text is not clickable. FYI, I only knew about 'pgsql'
> >> >> because I received email from them because I am an admin.
> >> >
> >> > I have now made the text clickable to redirect to the sf-editor-updated
> >> > version. :-)
> >>
> >> If there is another one. That's automatically updated. Why not just
> >> *drop* this one?
> >
> > I can mark it as an "Abandoned" project --- done. Is that better?
> >
> > https://sourceforge.net/p/pgsql/admin/overview
> >
> > That is my only other option (active, moved, abandoned). I don't think
> > so, but take a look.
>
> No, that seems really bad. It now says "As of 2013-04-12, this project
> is no longer under active development."

I didn't think you were going to like that, but you had to see it. ;-)

> I also notice we've had 49 downloads this week. Which is pretty bad
> since it's all of outdated versions.
>
> Perhaps you should change it back to the link, but also try to find
> out if there is a way to *delete* the current downloads that are
> horribly out of date. Since people are clearly using them.

OK, changed to "Moved", and I have removed all the download files
associated with our project.

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

+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +

In response to

Browse pgsql-www by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2013-04-13 14:50:12 Re: Git lag
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2013-04-12 18:27:18 Re: Updating Sourceforge