Re: Updates for PostgreSQL.org one-click installer download pages

From: Andy Astor <andya(at)bigsql(dot)com>
To: Joshua Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Marc Linster <marc(dot)linster(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, David Rader <davidr(at)openscg(dot)com>, Scott Mead <scottm(at)openscg(dot)com>, "pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Updates for PostgreSQL.org one-click installer download pages
Date: 2016-07-14 16:11:15
Message-ID: E01C6103-071A-4468-8A72-746932B9AF9D@bigsql.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-www


I believe it is appropriate to allow some leeway to differentiate offerings on these pages, provided they are brief, fact-based, and understated. Such differentiations provide the community with useful information. If all the offerings are instead presented identically, then a new user would have to click-through to each company site to understand the differences, which carries at least two problems. First, it adds friction and inconvenience to the user experience. Second, there would be no balanced presentation of the options; only marketing. With a peer-reviewed patch system such as the one we have, we drive companies toward fact-based statements, which I think is very valuable to the community.

Andy


Andy Astor
OpenSCG / BigSQL
+1.415.213.2500

> On Jul 14, 2016, at 8:48 AM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On 07/14/2016 07:45 AM, Dave Page wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>>> On 07/14/2016 07:11 AM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
>
>>> There is a pending patch that obsoletes the patches by the vendors. That
>>> patch needs more comments (approval/rejection) before this is applied.
>>
>> I pointed out that the current layout came about as a result of a lot
>> of experimentation etc. You have done nothing that I've seen to show
>
> Which is why the changes I made are very conservative and in fact don't change the organization of the pages in any way. The only thing I did was now take into account that we (.Org) have more than one installer to promote.
>
>> that your alternative patch would not cause a regression in what that
>> work achieved, and thus I strongly object to such changes. Others I've
>> spoken irl had similar concerns.
>
> Then let them speak here.
>
> Dave, instead of just saying , "I strongly object" why not provide some specific and constructive feedback? That would allow us to build a patch that will satisfy the community and provide a compromise for our external vendors that is neutral and fair?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> JD
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/
> +1-503-667-4564
> PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
> Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-www mailing list (pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-www

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-www by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Page 2016-07-14 16:14:35 Re: Updates for PostgreSQL.org one-click installer download pages
Previous Message Dave Page 2016-07-14 16:04:04 Re: Updates for PostgreSQL.org one-click installer download pages