Re: Cleaning up the Download options

On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 3:33 PM Oleg Bartunov <obartunov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
wrote:

> On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 6:14 PM Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:
> >
> > I've just reviewed all the download options on the website. A number are
> out of date or have other issues, so I think we need to have a cleanup:
> >
> > Primary downloads:
> >
> > - postgresql.org packages are up to date.
> > - EDB installers are up to date.
> > - BigSQL installers are up to date.
> > - postgres.app is up to date.
> > - Fink is a release behind on 9.4 through 10, and doesn't carry 11 at
> all as far as I can tell.
> > - MacPorts is up to date.
> > - The Homebrew link seems to go to a download site which after many
> clicks gives me the Windows installer from EDB(!). I've fixed that now. The
> packages appear to be a release behind on all supported branches.
> >
> > Thoughts on whether we should make any changes to the Fink and Brew
> distributions? We used to require that the primary downloads be maintained
> on our schedule, so by rights they should be removed.
> >
> > Secondary (third party) downloads:
> >
> > - LiveCD - this hasn't been updated since 9.6 in December 2016. It
> should be removed.
> >
> > - 2UDA - This hasn't been updated since May 2018, and is currently
> carrying 11beta1, 10.4, 9.6.9 and 9.5.13. I think this should be removed.
> >
> > - TurnKey - Deploying this requires signing up to their service. I
> eventually tracked down the manifest file for their images and found they
> ship 9.4.6. This should be removed.
> >
> > - BitNami images are up to date.
> >
> > Comments etc? I'm out from EOD until Tuesday, but will review any
> comments somewhen after then, and make changes as appropriate (including
> following my own suggestions if noone disagrees with them :-p ).
>
> We submitted download page for windows packages
> https://postgrespro.com/windows

Yes, but adding them is way outside the scope of what I'm proposing here.
There are issues that would require discussion (on a different thread), e.g.

- Your packages include patches to PostgreSQL that are not in the community
repo.
- Your packages include changes to LGPL licenced third party components
that may put unexpected and onerous requirements on end users or users that
embed in other products.
- What happens if a user gets confused and tries to upgrade an existing
installation from the BigSQL or EDB installers with one of yours (or the
other way round)? Will it break their system?
- You're packaging a version of pgAdmin that hasn't been supported in years
and will likely fail in numerous ways with modern PostgreSQL versions. As
the person most likely to get bug reports about that (which will be
ignored), I certainly don't want us to be distributing pgAdmin 3 with
modern builds of PostgreSQL.

There may be more things, but those are issues I spotted in a few minutes
on the Github repo, that I think would need discussion before we could
consider adding more installers (and right now, I know a number of people
think we should be doing the opposite, and simplifying the choices given to
users).

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

EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company