Re: Adding PGInstaller to the Downloads section

> On Aug 29, 2018, at 4:20 AM, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 8:22 PM, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org <mailto:jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>> wrote:
> On 8/28/18 3:15 PM, Justin Clift wrote:
> > On 2018-08-28 20:06, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 08:01:12PM +0100, Justin Clift wrote:
> >>> On 2018-08-28 18:32, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >>> >Well, if we have another installer provider who has similar or better
> >>> >performance for things we care about, e.g. reliable updates, support,
> >>> >_and_ is willing to host the binaries where we want them, we can
> >>> switch
> >>> >to them. While it is kind of disloyal to change preferred
> >>> providers, we
> >>> >also didn't agree to have them be preferred forever, especially if
> >>> >someone better shows up. Of course, switching might be disruptive for
> >>> >our installers uses, so we have to consider that too.
> >>>
> >>> An alternative approach would be for us ("the project") to build
> >>> official
> >>> installers ourselves, with those being the recommended ones.
> >>
> >> Uh, we used to do that but found the user support overhead too much.
> >
> > No worries, was just a thought. :)
>
> Well, a few things has changed since the decision was made, such as
> tools, resources, and in some cases, people, so we do have a good
> opportunity to reevaluate and see what makes sense. The success of the
> yum + apt repositories also provides a template for how to manage &
> support the installers.
>
> I do understand it is a bit more involved (i.e. there are interface
> components with a lot of these) but perhaps we can do what the other
> packages do and install the minimum for supporting a PostgreSQL environment.
>
> You're missing a ton of history here.

Thank you for filling in some of the missing pieces for me!

> PostgreSQL (many, many years ago) used to get a *lot* of negative reactions because it was hard to install an environment that was complete and ready to go, with GUI etc as Windows/Mac users typically expect - in comparison to MySQL which had that nailed.

I for one will say that back in that day, I did fall into the “had a challenge
installing” camp, but from it I learned how to build from source.

> The original PGInstaller project fixed that for Windows, by bundling PG, pgAdmin and a bunch of other things together. Unfortunately it was an absolute PITA to maintain.
>
> We (various -core folks) agreed with EDB that they would build new installers covering all platforms. These were designed to be much easier to maintain, and added StackBuilder to ease that further by de-coupling many of the components, whilst at the same time continuing to make it much easier for people to add to their installations.
>
> After some years we managed to get the RPM/DEB packaging and download flow much more simplified, to the point that that route is easy (and preferred) for Linux users. FYI, the EDB installers for Linux are no longer being produced for 11.x onwards.

Which sounds like we will need to make some updates to the Linux
download pages (or the lack of updates?) ;-)

> On Windows and Mac the EDB (and equivalent installers from other folks) are still produced and will likely continue to be. First and foremost of course, because they make it very easy to install and get up and running.

In fact, I have referred people to setting up PostgreSQL on their local envs
with those exact installers.

> That of course, needs to remain the primary focus; and simplifying any packages to a minimum will be a major step backwards.

With the history you presented that makes sense; primarily I was focused on trying
to find some way to help facilitate making it easier to support the installers in the
.org environment, where in this discussion, my primary focus is ensuring it’s easy
for people to download and install PostgreSQL. While I have opinions on packaging,
I defer to the people who actually have to maintain the packages as I know doing so
is a lot of work.

Anyway, to bring this full circle, I +1 Magnus’ earlier suggestions wrt the featured
installers and what goes on the 3rd Party Installations page. We could figure out
if .org wants to host its own Mac/Windows installers if someone volunteers to do
so.

Jonathan