Re: Add AIX on the PostgreSQL Download page

On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 3:26 PM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> wrote:

> > On 7 Sep 2021, at 16:10, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
> >
> > On 9/7/21 4:06 AM, REIX, Tony wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I am interested in knowing if AIX could be added to the PostgreSQL page
> >> https://www.postgresql.org/download/ , either as a link to a PostgreSQL
> >> web-site page where instructions can be given and updated about where to
> >> get RPMs for AIX and how to install them, plus news about new versions
> >> and releases, or a link to a page out of PostgreSQL web-site.
> >>
> >> We (Bull/ATOS BullFreeware: http://www.bullfreeware.com, and IBM AIX
> >> ToolBox:
> >>
> https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/aix-toolbox-linux-applications-overview)
> >> are providing OpenSource packages (inc. PostgreSQL) for AIX under RPM
> >> format since ages and we'd like to enable PostgreSQL for AIX to be more
> >> visible by PostgreSQL users.
> >
> > Looking at the available packages[1], it does not appear that all of the
> > community supported versions are updated (e.g. the last 9.6 updates were
> > in 2018). It also seems that package updates are random -- e.g. there
> > was a 13.1 release, and a 13.4 release, which misses several bug fix +
> > security releases, and they come out several weeks after the release.
>
> Do we have a strict policy around this? Some package managers are still at
> 13.3 ~ a month out and the Fink macOS package manager doesn’t have v13 at
> all
> AFAICT?
>

The packages in the "primary" section are supposed to be released in sync
with our releases, and their packagers are expected to keep in the loop on
the -packagers list.

Ones that are released later should either be unlisted, or in the 3rd party
section.

>
> > I'd be more open to this if the packages themselves were hosted on
> > community infrastructure and were consistent with the rest of the
> > packaging projects.
>
> That seems a high bar to cross given that we don’t host macOS, Windows and
> the
> BSD’s today but link to those.
>

I agree.

>
> > Right now I'm -1 on this; additionally, I'm
> > generally -1 to adding more additional offsite links to downloads.
>
> Unrelated but semi-related, if we don’t want new links we should probably
> remove the Solaris download link which doesn’t even link to downloadable
> packages.
>

+1

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

EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com