Re: PostgreSQL package download for Solaris 11.4

On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 3:32 PM Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>
wrote:

> On 9/12/22 6:42 AM, Marcel Hofstetter wrote:
>
> >
> >>> Also, I don't think it's fair to complain about the javascript part.
> >>> While I
> >>> agree it's laughable that it's now apparently impossible to find a
> >>> page that
> >>> displays text or links without millions of lines code of javascript
> >
> > The download page is not for you guys. It is for Solaris users.
> > They have javascript enabled anyway, because the Oracle Support Portal
> > and many other modern websites use/require javascript.
> >
> > For MacOS and Windows a link to external pages is no problem.
> > Why is it a problem for Solaris and AIX?
>
> The reason for this with MacOS/Windows installers is historical. Many
> folks have mentioned that "this ship has sailed" for adding links to 3rd
> party sites, though I will note that we did have a major cleanup in the
> recent past by removing a large chunk of those links (see [1], and
> possibly some other threads).
>

Yeah. Just because something is bad now, doesn't mean we should double down
on it.

> As we do the work of the buildfarm, building and creating the packages,
> > we will keep our page. For me it makes no sense to maintain additional
> > sites. Where is the benefit for you if the packages are on your site?
>
> There are a few reasons:
>
> 1. Consistent user experience. It makes it easier for users to access
> the various binaries all in one
>
> 2. Easier to troubleshoot when issues occur. We do get reports of
> "unable to download XYZ" and find out it is due to an issue on one of
> the 3rd party sites. So we then spend our time chasing that down and
> trying to get it fixed vs. having control of being able to fix it
> ourselves. This creates a bad experience for our users and reflects
> poorly on .org, so having more control to be able to remediate issues
> more quickly is preferable.
>
> 3. Ongoing commitment to support. I'm glad you suggest you'll be able to
> have the packages available in 1-2 days; this is typically what would
> happen when we would start linking to another website with downloads.
> However, we have seen through the years that there is a nonzero chance
> that this support degrades, so I think it is good to exercise caution.
>
> 4. Cost of upkeep on our end. Dave & I ran a study a few years back
> (threads in -www archives) to better understand how much traffic went to
> external sources. Outside of the MacOS/Windows installers, the numbers
> were fairly minimal[1].
>
> 5. Ensuring authenticity / integrity of the downloads. Requirements
> include ensuring the packaging files are open source. I don't presently
> see those for these packages, but I may also be looking in the wrong place.
>
> Getting a link from .org to a different website is very valuable,
> especially for downloads, so I think it's OK for us to be vigorous in
> vetting it.
>
> Now, I've mentioned in the past that if we add some policy around
> including third party links, I'd be open to that. I'm happy to write up
> a draft for that, noting that we're currently in the throes of the major
> release cycle.
>

Perhaps a reasonable way forward would be to put it under the Software
Catralogue, with a section for PostgreSQL distributions? Then it's more
clear that it's a third party distribution, and we hold those links to a
much lighter moderation level?

//Magnus